Could the Seraphim be coming to SupCom2

Please go to this page, there is a thing of interest on it... A possible Seraphim return, read the paragraph just above the game case picture.
Note I am only guessing, by what I read there. I am probably wrong.
http://uman.square-enix-europe.com/trac ... l&id=VIDEO|||uh no, that's just fluff speak. That whole thing is primarily for the DLC pack.|||I concur with above.
However, I would like to see seraphim in supcom 2. They were my fav in FA |||The game files already reference the Seraphim, at least in the UI section. There are Textures (Seraphim_Load.dds, etc.) and other things in there. I certainly hope this means they come back.|||Please god, no!
Though, it would be quite an easy way to do a second DLC. Everyone gets Seraphim, but only people who buy it can use them, and can play with everyone else, even those with no DLC.
But I ******* hate the seraphim. They were just so...useless. They were missing tons of units that other factions had recieved ages ago. They had the correct number, for a vanilla faction, but before FA came out. I can imagine it again, them having the same number and complexity of research tree of a pre-dlc faction, instead of the complexity and depth of a post dlc one.|||I donno, the Seraphim's main selling point is the fact that any and all of their units are powerhouses that are more powerful than any other faction's equivalent.
Unfortunately for them, their T1 tanks had to be balanced, or they'd simply roll over everyone. And because most games end in a T1 vs T1 blob (with T2 having difficulty making a dent), the Seraphim got themselves screwed.
Plus think of it this way: In SupCom2, we only have (counting only UEF ground forces) 1 tank, 1 artillery, 1 bot, 1 shield, 1 AA, 2 Engineers, 1 ACU and 2 Exps. That's not a lot of variety either.
The Seraphim will fit right in...|||The seraphim would've fit so perfectly in supcom 2, I was so sad they excluded them.
Though, that being said we'll probably not see them in this game, since, fluffwise, their units and stuff got merged into the aeon (hell, they even stole the sera gunship).|||wkz|||Submersible destroyer is still the coolest single idea I've ever encountered, and the Ilshavoh was baller.|||ninjageek|||Z32|||I felt that your mod was terribly and disagreed strongly with how you envisioned 'faction diversity'
I believe we went through this once before.|||Z32|||I looked back at my mod and, apparently, supcom 2 took a lot of cues from it. For example, the limited units from the start. In my mod, all you got from a T1 naval fac was a frigate. All a T1 air fac gave you was a bomber. Pretty similar to supcom 2.|||FunkOff|||wkz|||There would need to be a proper expansion pack to bring them back, just sticking them in a DLC pack without any story behind it might annoy some ppl. And I'm not sure the community behind supcom2 is large enough to make an expansion pack viable.
I'm not even convinced that we'll see another DLC, I hope that we do.. But how many people actually purchased DLC1? There's been talk on the forums of it splitting the community so I'm guessing that not everyone got it?|||redmoth|||DeadMG|||Z32|||Kahooli|||How do their T3 Subs do vs air?|||Kahooli|||Faction roles, imo should be:
Cybran: Multipurpose, stealth
UEF: Brute force, turtling
Aeon: Tactical strike
Seraphim: ????? They had no defined role, really, besides combining the other three. imo the problem with the entire faction.|||FunkOff

Lategame air needs a nerf or lategame anti air a buff

I think I already posted this earlier, but i dont know exactly.
Id like to give some thoughts about air in SupCom2.
What is wrong with it?
Well in the early game till 8-10 minutes air seems fine. You can easily counter them with mobile anti air.
But the later the game, the imba air gets. The only way to counter air as non-cybran is air itself. and that sucks.
Why is that so?
While in early game you dont have enough bombing power to insta kill any target, you have to do several circles above the enemies anti air to kill something. this is why anti air gets enough time to make some damage.
While in the end you have over 9000 bombers (at least) and they will insta kill any tower, any anti air blobs, any factories, and any shield, your ground anti air cannot do full damage.
Air blobs release full damage within 2 seconds, anti air is dead and could only shoot 2 or 3 seconds, doing nearly no damage.
How could one fix this?
An example of how to fix it is Adaptors. Those do enough damage and due to shields can only hard be insta killed.
Im sure you dont want to add shields to all Ground Anti air.
Maybe the players here have some more ideas, but i would think of Splash upgrade for anti air in late game. THis could solve it, cos bombers are always crowded when not microed (atm there is no need or micro).
What do you think about this? if we come up with good reasons we might see some changes/additions in further patchs/dlcs|||As I explained before, the adaptor shield can absorb tremendous damage because it seems to stay up for a few ticks after receiving its damage limit, allowing it to block 10 or more bombs.
If UEF shields or unit personal shields worked this way, I think they would resists bombers better late game.|||but 1. they dont and 2. that would be a bug more or less ^^
but would you agree that lategame anti air needs a buff?|||Well there are late game AA upgrades. Bombbouncers, Airnomo, Megafort. The only one of those that needs a buff is the airnomo. It could do with what we did to it in the CBP (more range and damage). There isn't need for it to have AoE because with the range and damage it absolutely rapes air, the air may bomb what they want to bomb but they lose a LOT in that effort.|||megafortress is not the kind of air counter i like. its air. and id like to have alternatives to air. I think for uef the rockhead/arty/bot aa upgrade is ok too, but as aeon, as you point out, the only valid thing would be airnomo which sucks.|||If I were able to change the game, I'd change the way air balance works. Anti-air, whether turret or to a lesser extent mobile AA, would tear apart gunships. Bombers should be used to neutralize ground-based AA especially turret. Gunships would be devastating to undefended ground, but would be very vulnerable to AA fire and fighters.
While it's true there's some counters to Air such as the Airnomo and Bomb Bouncers, it doesn't take into consideration that those units can only be in one place at at a time. If you build static AA, or an airnomo, or a bomb bouncer... just use your air to hit elsewhere. Meanwhile, those static AA turrets and slow ground units are out of position and not providing a benefit for how much mass they took to construct.
About the only land-based AA i actually like is the Pullensmash, because it has a wide enough area to provide good coverage and works versus air and ground.
Right now the game has a lot of tools available to defeat someone how focuses entirely on ground. LRA, Fatboys, Jackhammers, Fortified Artillery, Urchinows, Collosi, Kryptors, Megaliths, AC-1000s, Soul Rippers, Sooprizers, Dinos, Monkeylords and standard gunships are HARD counters to masses of T1 units. To stop masses of gunships you have... Bomb bouncers, Airnomos (both of which have to be in the right place at the right time and can be outflanked). Really, your only real counter to Air is going Air, what with all the hard counters to Land that exist.
A simple solution to me would be Flak. There needs to be a mid/late structure and land upgrade that provides some sort of area of effect AA capability. Gunships, while typically better than bombers because they don't spread around so much, could be countered hardest by it. It'd make you think twice before gunship-sniping ACUs or important structures.
I'm a huge fan of Supcom2, but the one part of the game I feel is really out of whack is the Air balance. I don't feel like they've taken the mobility factor into consideration when doing the balancing.|||VoW-Kryo|||but on some occasions if you dont start with air, you even wont get an air player, that started producin earlier with air. even as uef.
The problem with air battles is: Once you have an advantage you will not lose it fast.|||VoW-Kryo|||VoW-Kryo|||Aside from the usual buff Airnomo, AA turret, which both are necessary, what about increasing build times for air units? If blobs are such an issue, turning up the build times by 10-20% could potentially help.|||Thinking about it, I would be happy if they doubled the attack range of mobile AA but left the damage alone.|||Theres a distinctive lack of decent upgrades for mobile anti-air in general, whilst air units generally get a bevy of air-to-ground upgrades.
I think a univerasal nerf to wasp/gemini/weedoboth health (perhaps as much as 20%) would help make them easier to crowd control by anti-air into the lategame. Additionally, I have almost never seen any real gunship play by cybran or aeon since the well-needed gunship nerf. Now that they aren't partifularly broken, it isn't really worth teching them when you have an air-to-ground unit that is RP-free, and also your most effective air-to-air.
A huge health nerf to them would mean that, while they retain their bombing capability, it is relegated to only sniping undefended targets, necessitating gunships to perform any sort of real air-to-ground damage under the presence of anti-air. In addition, it'd increase the strategic variation and skill involved in air combat, since flying over a patch of anti-air would be able to do significant damage to an air blob.
Currently, if someone lures your air blob over your anti-air and trieds to engage you, you can simply run away outside of the aa range, and turn back to engage, and the damage and losses are minimal. The only way anti-air is really going to impact a battle for air supremacy is if somepone is stupid enough to fight over enemy aa.
If fighters had much lower health, simply drawing the enemy blob over aa for a few moments would be enough to deal considerable damage, even without actually engaging them over it. The location and positioning of your ground-based anti-air would be a pivotal element of combatting for air supremacy, and creating another element to air combat beyond "hurr I build more fighter".
I think this might be of particular benefit to cybran, considering they ultimately get the best and most mobile anti-air, to pair along with the worst fighter. And the lack of bombing upgrades for the gemini wouldn't be quite so much of a shortcoming.|||Add an option on each AA tower to either convert it, for the price of 200 mass, into EITHER a flak tower, or a SAM tower. Flak does small damage, large splash. SAM does large damage, no splash. SAM is best versus late game experimentals. Flak is best versus blobs.|||A research option to do that wouldn't be too bad either. Maybe to replace that goddawful shields-for-defence-towers research.|||Nerfing lategame air will create stalemates or very long boring games. I think it is fine as it is.|||I'd like lategame (mobile) aa buffed. I'd like mobile AA buffed in general. I'd probably like a range buff best.|||Manta|||I rather want tower AA to not be able to kill a massive blob of air though. How else is air going to be effective against turtlers? I definitely wouldn't mind making mobile AA better though as air is currently too strong against ground units, but air seems to be quite balanced against bases and turtlers to be honest.|||The issue here is that air units can dish out all their DPS in three seconds, whereas AA towers (especially the Airnomo) cant.|||Grim Tuesday|||VoW-Kryo|||Aeon get teleport and shields on their MAA. If the map isnt too big, they do quite well. You get problems when covering big distances. Still, they have the best AA towers (shield and damage upgrade)|||Nephylim|||Fair point about detonate. But, if you are going to count in cost, you might as well count the Aeon economy bonuses, which are 25% more mass and energy, which you can also interpret as a 20% cost decrease for EVERYTHING. Also, shields regenerate WAY faster than health, so it counts for more.
Edit: Due to shield mechanics, shields are even better because they suck up overkill. And another point you might want to consider: Aeon shields have 25% more health than cybran ones, and give you energy when fired upon.

DLC RELEASED write up and price

*EDIT*
NOW RELEASED ON STEAM
*EDIT*
PC Gamer release Article on DLC, with the price tag.
http://www.pcgamer.com/2010/09/27/supreme-commander-2-infinite-war-out-tomorrow/
£7 to me is well worth it.
So where do i sign up :)|||I've bought Supreme Commander on the release date 50€. FA on the release date +- 30€. Supreme Commander 2 on the release date 55€. And now they want me to pay 10€ for stuff that should have been in the release (I'am talking about the map, not the units)? No thanks.|||
So how much are the units worth to you?
Chris|||Downloading right now.|||Its out!?!?
*goes to check steam*
HOLY ****
Downloading also
Chris|||Yep: http://store.steampowered.com/dlc/40100/ :)|||and we get extra maps as well. Who said Xbox360 was the only one getting maps. Wonder how many maps we get?
Edit: Wow 8 new maps. I am very happy at my new purchase.|||mojom@n|||They need much more accurate screenshots for the DLC. The ones shown on the steam page appear to be old SupCom 2 screenshots.|||Spooky|||I've paid 60€ for this game (to have all the bonus maps).
Now the bonus maps are available to everyone and I have to pay 10€ more for a small DLC ?
Well that's not gonna happen, sry. 5€ would have been ok but 10 is just a lame joke|||No this is a lame joke.....
Quote:|||you wish
10€ is like a half of the "full" game's price.|||chrislove01|||The price is fine. If you dont agree dont buy. Your loss.
Capitalism at work ;-D|||Indeed, it is your choice.
Mine is downloaded and ready to go
|||Bought it.
This will be awesome |||does it change the normal units's balance ?|||The game won't start. I think it is because I had it at rez of 1920*1080 and now I'm away from home and I'm using a monitor that has a rez of 1680*1050 so the game won't start. does any one know what I can do? or is it just a bug. it was doing it yesterday as well so it isn't the DLC.
edit: I deleted the game pref file and the game started fine. thanks for the help. cheers.|||Quote:|||Well personally I think...
cyrilthebest8|||Damn, that review is absolute gold. Made me LOL pretty damn hard at times.|||_Golgoth_|||cyrilthebest8|||Asking price is a bit steep.
I'll wait for an eventual sale, I think.

[BUG] Factories and ACUs do not finish when paused

According to the patch notes of the "Infinite Queue" patch (1.23), factories and engineers will finish their current job when paused.
Quote:|||I also have noticed that the unit in production also pauses with the factory, unlike how it should be.|||RPhilMan1|||Spooky|||Actually I haven't noticed this. Whenever I pause a fac, the unit finishes building. I don't know about ACU or engies though.|||According to sorian it only happens with the DLC active.|||Fixed in the last patch (also for the Factories, not just the ACU).

Half Baking.

So it recently occurred to me that some experimentals, like the Cicada, don't necessarily need to attack to prove useful.
In this case, what is the downside to half-baking aside from the fact that they come out of the factory with lower health and occasionally stop moving? As long as a Cicada's ability remains active during the EMP, it doesn't really matter if it's half-baked or not, and its already sizeable healthpool still remains quite considerable, even at 1/2.|||I have not half baked a cicada, but every XP I have bake is nearly useless. The ML, for example, has to re-accelerate after every EMP, cutting it's speed to *maybe* as high as half as without the EMP.
Also, the cicada's primary defense is it's speed... it can dodge as well as a small unit. I would say half baking a cicada is prolly not worth it.|||Quote:|||Air forts are nice to half bake, but only when you dont really have time. Ive never really had the need to, and the ability to move them is pretty neat.
Still, I would like the EMP to wear down at some point.|||Air forts have almost as much ground dps as AC-1000s.|||I particularly like their crash damage, but thats just to rub into someones face that his power farm strategy fails.
Step 1: make 4 air forts
Step 2: Fill each with 25 gunships
Step 3: Move to enemy base and launch them
Step 4: Crash air forts into enemy power farm
Step 5: Snipe ACU with gunships before his air/AA kills them all|||I have only half-baked a unit once. I was playing a 3v3 and we were about to be overrun. So, i half-baked my fatboy and when my opponent saw the shells he completely stopped his advance and retreated. Thats the only time i've seen it work. If he kept pushing though, he would have easily wiped out my base.|||I think that this was one of CTs really great ideas, it just wasn't implemented properly. It's obviously a niche ability; it's only used if you are out of time. I think that if they had the EMP stop once the machine was fully repaired, or if not that, then after a certain amount of time, it might be used more often. Granted, this has been discussed huge already, but I still stand by this.|||If the EMP stopped when it was repaired there would be no point in not half baking. I like half baking the way it is myself. It's not something you do because you could use it earlier, it's something you do when you're desperate. I won a 4v4 by half baking a cicada to save me from a certain red menace's protobrains just today. The game I played against Cyclonic in the CEVO tournament I half baked a bomb bouncer to save my commander from a tank drop. I don't understand the complaints about half baking. You don't have to use it, and if you do, you do so knowing you're gimping your experimental.|||The point I was trying to make is that something like the Cicada, whose primary effect isn't at all impacted by being half-baked, would probably benefit more from being finished in 1/2 the time than it would be gimped by the EMP.
It might actually be effective, especially when rushing it in a 1v1 or the like, to half bake your cicada and just send an engineer to follow it around, slowly repairing it whenever it EMP's. It takes half the time to build it, but its stealth ability isn't affected at all (atleast, I assume so).
Megaforts are the same idea; nobody ever builds megaforts for anything other than buildpower, so assuming the EMP doesn't pause production, there's really no reason to not HB them.|||With a commander assisting it, you're only getting yourself a little extra time by half baking it, but you're also slowing its deployment anyways due to the emp, so I'd say it's not worth half baking unless you need it immediately.|||I have never half baked. Only fully baked. |||Well, Having the EMP stop after a while STILL gives you a reason to not use it: The few minutes in between, you cant really use it offensively. You try to kite with an EMPing megalith..|||Yeah a BB can be useful to HB...you usually want one over your com anyway and it doesn't really need to move.

Patch 1.24

Fixes and Improvements

• Increased lobby timeout to 8 seconds as an experiment, up from 4. This will increase matchmaker leniency, but may result in more shaky connections being permitted into games
  
• Save Game Load fixes. Rare broken save games from v1.23 should load correctly now
  
• Fix for illuminate Quantum Floating units sometimes not leaving wreckage, not firing off their death weapon, and not being able to fire their weapons when built on water
  
• Fix for ACUs not finishing their current project when paused
  
• Fixed UI based economy exploit

Balance

• Adjusted vanilla tuning of Loyalists to match DLC.
  
• Adjusted vanilla tuning of Cybran Jump Jets to match DLC.
  
• Adjusted DLC tuning of Illuminate PD to match vanilla

AI

• Fix for AI platoons being too timid.
  
• Increased AI Prioritizing of enemy ACUs.
  
• Fix for the AI researching items twice after loading a saved game or starting a game with all research unlocked.
  
• Neural Net platoon fixes to salvo calculations. Should result in more persistent attacks.
  
• AI will attack a non-targeted enemies area if they can't attack anything else

// ah, damn, there already is a thread, only searched for "patch"|||I agree, I would prefer to have the patch # in the thread title. And this thread is easier to read. :)|||RPhilMan1

Supcom2 Update

Updates to Supreme Commander 2 have been released. The updates will be applied automatically when your Steam client is restarted. The major changes include:
Fixes and Improvements
Increased lobby timeout to 8 seconds as an experiment, up from 4. This will increase matchmaker leniency, but may result in more shaky connections being permitted into games
Save Game Load fixes. Rare broken save games from v1.23 should load correctly now
Fix for illuminate Quantum Floating units sometimes not leaving wreckage, not firing off their death weapon, and not being able to fire their weapons when built on water
Fix for ACUs not finishing their current project when paused
Fixed UI based economy exploit
Balance
Adjusted vanilla tuning of Loyalists to match DLC.
Adjusted vanilla tuning of Cybran Jump Jets to match DLC.
Adjusted DLC tuning of Illuminate PD to match vanilla
AI
Fix for AI platoons being too timid.
Increased AI Prioritizing of enemy ACUs.
Fix for the AI researching items twice after loading a saved game or starting a game with all research unlocked.
Neural Net platoon fixes to salvo calculations. Should result in more persistent attacks.
AI will attack a non-targeted enemies area if they can't attack anything else

Discuss|||No balance changes |||I made a sadface.|||Save game fix has me confused. Is this v. 1.24? Great, now that HoF will never get filled.
I like the UI economy exploit fix and I feel like that, along with the AI fix, were the main reasons this update was pushed. Wish they'd fix some of the other, lesser bugs while they were at it however. I didn't realize that Illum PD were a bit cheaper till now too. Haha |||They fixed the hacker exploit and the AI timid problem and possible the lobby issue. Those are worth a patch cheer arent they?
Plus Funk, you yourself did say it was mostly well balanced? |||What was the UI exploit anyway? I figure now that it's fixed it can't hurt to tell.|||Probably to get extra RP, or to purchase upgrades without actually having the RP to do so.|||wneubert|||sorian|||So, if lobby disconnects get better, and the hacking now patched... MP may be alive again? |||They fixed the hacking? I thought they fixed the insane mass exploit like cat said. Not the one that ranked players are using to get ridiculous amounts of RP for free.
Also, I believe the exploit only gave you free mass. Still need to get energy the legit way.|||dawumyster|||RPhilMan1|||vax2007|||Unfortunately, it doesn't look like there's anyone to report to. Sup2 doesn't use VAC (thank God) so you can't cry to anyone at Steam support. GPG would be the only people capable of doing anything. Since they haven't yet patched it out nor clobbered his profile, I'm going to take an educated guess and say that GPG is sitting on it until they fix it entirely, or haven't worked out a solution.|||duncane|||Nice patch, AI is more aggressive now.
But still, late-game AI seems to mass ~40++ major land experimentals in their base and do nothing with them.
Also the invisible-buildings and invisible-engineers bug against the AI still happens.|||Sorian: +1, as always. The hard AI will probably crush me on 2v2 maps now, if I dont rush...
Balancing: -1, as its absent.|||wneubert|||Nephylim|||I played a couple games now. The first time I won in what seemed an easy victory, but the AI did attack so I wasn't sure what to think. Besides it was barely above normal and 1v1.
The next game though was a FFA with 3AI, custom about midway between normal and hard. OMG, they pounded me into the dirt like I have never seen before. I still can't believe it. If it wasn't the AI, I'd be thinking they cheated. If this was any indication, the AI is back with a vengence.
AI did mass 10 AC-130 near his base, then used them to annihilate me, which is exactly what I like to do:)|||redmoth|||connection issue didnt feel any better this evening.|||Did things work better after the steam update today? (You've got to restart the steam client to update.)|||Didnt really notice much of a difference...

microing air

My friend and I were having a 1v1 match, we both hadn't played in a while, i went land he went air, he sent out an air scout so i stopped going land and went air. I was uef he was cybran. he had a head start so from there on every battle that had air units, he had more because he had used his early bombers to kill all my outer mexes. He said I didn't know how to micro my air. I said you can't micro air, you can just choose good places to use it. He said I was very wrong. How do you micro air?|||you put it behind the enemy air|||I'm not entirely clear as to why the armies of the future are devoid of units that can fire aft of themselves... but yes, wherever your air is, you want it to be facing the enemy air, preferably with the enemy air not facing your air.|||I'm assuming the above two are keeping the "actual" micro trick (some read it as exploit-ish, but i don't see how it's different from dancing units) secret.
Word will cover air micro in his up-coming part-2 guide.|||sovietpride|||I focus more on the theory neph, you do more of the practical stuff
But I do have a few hints in my upcoming guide :)|||Nephylim|||there's a few neat tricks. You can tell your air units to stop periodically, which will force them to retarget, so they are always firing at something and not flying in a big circle chasing a target while not shooting at anything else.
Of course, getting behind the enemy blob is important, but it's only going to give you an advantage in a few kills, so it's not really worth going to extremes over.
Similarly, luring the enemy over anti-air is nice, and will give you a considerable advantage in any air battle, but they shouldn't be stupid enoughto stay and fight over there.|||sovietpride|||Quote:|||Ovens use a lot of power...
Something that Iron showed me, if you see one of your jets getting targeted by multiple enemy jets and probably won't last too much longer, have him fly out of the air blob in the quickest path possible. This will get all the other jets to chase after it, letting your other fighters get behind and completely unload in the rear.|||That is one of the reasons why you NEVER EVER attack air units by clicking on them. And why people like me use air micro.|||I think it was UncertainCat who originally showed me this, but for the past 2 months or so, I have been using almost exlcusively A-followed-by-left-click. This makes my fighters, I think, attack move. This seems to work much better than whatever I was doing before.
However, I recently did an Aeon air game after a long hiatus, and I *think* I saw my A-left-click order go afowl, as they tred to bomb some structures when I wanted them to kill some jets instead.|||vax2007|||vax2007|||Plain wrong. Air units have priority and get targeted first.

Cybran naval JJ range bug?

Guys - as a reminer, I have bad eyesight, so I can't reliably test this myself quickly. I don't need any a-holes telling me I'm too lazy to do stuff myself this time.
BUT, I think I saw a bug with Cybran naval jump jet, and was hoping someone could test it for me.
Remember how when you'd hilight a group of land units for cybran JJ or Aeon teleport, and originally, the circle showed the range that only *some* of the units could jump? You'd click teleport, and if the location was on the edge of the range circle, only a FEW of your units would JJ / teleport?
Then GPG fixed the range so that as long as you clicked anywhere in the green circle, ALL of your units would JJ / tele there. Nice!
I don't think this fix is in place for cybran naval JJ. I could swear I tried to JJ 10 executioners, toward the edge of the green circle, and only like 2 jumped.
Please let me know if you have similar findings? Thanks!!|||I just spent an hour trying to figure out exactly how jump jets work. I still don't know exactly how they work, but I can tell you that if you formation move your units they'll jump past their normal maximum range to keep up with the other bots, while if you control move they behave as they did before the jump jet change. Jump jets before the change were very simple, each unit has a max range, and when you gave a jump jet order, all units within range would jump. Now units that are in formation can get extra jump jet range to keep up with the crowd. After some testing there does seem to be a maximum range boost, but only seems to apply to loyalists holding still. Loyalists on the move in formation seem to be able to jump any distance so long as they too far away from the rest of the formation. I might be wrong on this. I'll report back after some more testing.|||Same as with teleport, you get a probably 15% (same as movement speed) range buff for units to keep up.|||UncertainCat|||Because what if you'd rather jump the units that you can now and worry about the others later? It may not always be the tactically best idea to wait for the other units first.|||vax2007|||Permabanned hopefully.
Nah, that wont happen. He just lost interest. Hopefully he is trolling mormon.org/chat... If any of you want to troll, troll there. Good fun.|||DeadMG|||harrier0|||dawumyster|||Sungyc|||Sungyc|||Sungyc|||vax2007|||Haters gonna hate my jackhammers.
|||And your airforts.|||And my kriptors. If I'd actually be as gay as to play gayeon, they'd probably hate my darkenoids and sooprizers too.

GPG: Next steps for SupCom2 AI.

I realize SupCom2 has been through many iterations and we may be dwindling on the amount of time and effort that GPG can/will spend on various improvements and fixes of the game. I'd like to say, as I dd in a previous thread, the AI is so much improved that it really, really adds value to skirmish mode and on-line comp stomps. *IF* Sorian is allowed more time on te AI, here are some misc. things I'd like to see addressed that I don't believe have been. Feel free to add your own.
*I APOLOGIZE AHEAD OF TIME IF ANY OF THESE HAVE ALREADY BEEN IMPLEMENTED. NO FLAMEZ PLX*
Note: In some of these, I say "Hard AI and above." What this essentially means is that I think it's worthy to add into the AI's behavior, but is probably an advanced tactic that should not be utilized by the lower difficulty of AIs.
- Hard AI and above should be able to use cybran structure detonate mass-efficiently. (Kill more units' worth of mass than the struc itself costs)
- It should stack magnetrons close to each other for full stacked effect
- Not spam as many bombers / gunships until it is more certain it has air superiority
- Not spam as many UEF cruisers / battleships until it is more certain it has naval superiority
- Make more use of beamgen and UEF mex gun / aa, especially as a defensive stopgap
- Does AI still charge blobs wrecklessly into PD walls? If so, this should be fixed.
- ACU needs to retreat sooner from massive incoming forces. Escape-type techs such as teleport, JJ, and escape pod should be prioritized when a pending threat is seen approaching.
- I seem to remember Sorian putting in a rule that the naval AI doesn't make more than 3 subs unless it sees other naval. I think this is no longer valid on large water maps. Sub spam should generally continue until it is verified that the wate is free and clear of threats IMO. This often times can not be done in the brief time it takes to spit out 3 subs.
- Hard AI and above should avoid firing nukes into the path of known boomerangs.
- Aeon AI should know how to make "tiered" space temples on giant maps. IE, sending an engineer through the first space temple to make a second temple, so as to traverse more of the giant map quickly.
- Hard UEF AIs and above should launch engineers from noahs to empty expansion points on the map.
- UEF AIs should make ample use of disruptor's stun effect if excess energy is available
- Hard AI and above should recognize a turtler and spam mml / fort arty / LRA appropriately.|||They really need to take advantage of the range of MML's when fighting pointdefense, rather than charging everything into range.
Should also adapt their army composition based on what they're fighting; for example less MML's if the other player has a comperable land presence, more MML's if the other player is trying to turtle, etc.|||Z32|||You kept mentioning "hard and above". Does the AI behave differently on hard than normal, or does it just have more resources and build speed. I thought it was just resources and speed that changed. And of course veterancy and fog of war can change too, but not the behavior.|||wneubert|||So who's writing Sorian's check for this? |||Z32|||The AI always seems to keep MML just out of range for my PD so I have to send tanks out to get them.
Also he built tanks, mml, pshield, mobile artillery, and mabye other stuff in last nights game, so he does use different units.

He does send the tanks in range while his MML pound me.|||wneubert|||Z32|||The AI for KnC needs to be easily modular and moddable, so they can hold AI developer tournaments using it.
I dont care about the actual quality of the AI shipped with the game ;)|||AdmiralZeech|||Take that back Zeech. Take it back NOW.|||I dunno. I kinda thought Zeech was onto something. Moddable AI seems like an awesome idea to me.|||Ok, sometimes he moves in with MML, but not always. I have some proof here.
http://www.gamereplays.org/supremecomma ... &id=166732
At about 5 min in and again at 6 min, he attacks, holds his MML back and defends them with tanks.
He then proceeds to completely blow it with his transports, which was a little disappointing.|||Nephylim|||No!


The AI is mine,


my own,


my preeeciouuuus!
|||@ Sorian: + >9000 for awesomeness

[BUG]: Can't attack move with air over wreckage.

Exactly what the subject says. As the ground gets more and more littered with debris from dead units, it becomes more and more likely, especially zoomed out, that when you issue an attack move order with A, followed by left clicking, that you accidentally click on an area with wreckage, and the order is not issued.
You can tell this because the move icon changes to, I *think*, the red circle with a line through it. (Sighted people double-check me please)
In my opinion, this is a bug. In no way should very-low-height wreckage prevent an attack-move order from being caried out by air units.
Thoughts?|||You're pressing "A", which is "Attack". To attack move, hold Alt and right click. This is not a bug, this is operator error.
FYI, the Icons for attack and attack move are the same.|||FunkOff|||I thought hitting A and clicking on unoccupied space did the same thing as attack move, at least with air. Air would move there and would engage and chase after anything that comes near it.
If this is not the case, then what's the difference?|||Attacking a wreck is technically a legitimate thing to do. As Z32 pointed out, it's a bit silly.
Just ALT+RIGHT everywhere.|||BulletMagnet|||Good point.|||Indeed, a-click or alt-click (makes no difference!) somewhere ELSE. If you are engaged in an air battle, it doesnt matter where you click. Your air will attack anything in sight.|||I think if you alt-click on wreckage it's still an attack-move to the wreckage's location, and not an attack on the wreckage.|||Oops double post|||Domenic|||Nephy, you are one of the naabs who whines.

Need help finding a post on connectivity.

I still encounter annoying players who insist on readying up and lanching as quickly as possible. Can someone PLEASE help me find the post where one of the GPG forum scouts / employees stated / confirmed it's a good idea to wait 10-20 seconds after the 8th player joins so that connectivity is established?|||http://forums.gaspowered.com/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=48892
Look for Servo's first post.

Link to abusive conduct guide?

There was dialogue in game from an individual tonight who I felt was making abusive and insulting remarks. Can someone please point me to the abuse guide for SupCom2 / Steam, and also refer me to any guide on how to officially prove / record the abuse and report it?
Thank you.|||vax2007|||I was a witness if that helps.|||dawumyster|||I've been accused while doing that also.
Here's one fairly recently. I was front as setons in a random game. I do my usual aggressive land push but was stalled by 3 opposing players. I then look back at what my allies were doing and all three of them have got mass conv and were still just spamming pgens. One rages about how I'm a noob and adds:
Quote:|||dawumyster|||Z32|||Reminds me of last night when I played a ranked game against a noob. He wasn't happy that I "rushed" him when, seeing that he'd built nothing but interceptors and mexes, I sent small packs of loyalists all over his base. What do you expect, me to just let you eco up in peace?|||Had that in a 1v1 against some player. I got mass convo, then started to bomb his base with a super triton (treallach island). After 5 mins of ranting and cursing, he asked how old he was "to make sure he didnt get owned by a kid". Then He asked me how I got so good. I told him to eat a nutricious breakfast. What else? :O|||I make a point to build load of engineers and reclaim their bases if they are retards. Then after recaliming my team's base I go over and win the game XD|||Ha ha, I got the worst one.
I did a 2v2 with randoms on Isis, and an oponent scouted 2 minutes in with a fighter.
My ally started Shouting "SCOUT, THEIR RUSHING!!! **** **** **** RUUUUSH".
So he built 3 land facs at his starting location and stayed there for ten minutes, untill our oponents steamrolled us with hundreds of tanks...
Scout rush. Fear it.|||Word, I was actually going to do that had I not been in such a tight spot in the front.
Vax, sorry for hijacking your thread =/|||BlackFish|||This thread makes me want to play.|||well I'd separate nobiness, bad team mates and non fair-play amongst plainly users insulting, bitching others or being absolutely an a$$ in the games.
I think that that was the OP's original point. Looks to me like so, though.|||Normally though if somebody is being a retard just type back all in caps. Hilarity ensues and anything that they say, no matter how serious, just lacks all the edge :)

question about factory assisst

I am and old supcom "vet", that read that some changes had been made, to the eco/que system, so i wanted to give supcom2 a chance.
i do have a question however.
in supcom1 i could que everything up in 1 land factory and then have my other factory's assist the first factory so I ever only had to change the que 1 place and/or the way point one place, am I still able to do that in supcom2?, if so how?|||Nope. Not possible now.|||thanks for your reply.
dang!.|||This was one of my favorite features of the original supcom, and I sorely miss it in supcom2!|||Hnngg... naah... Factories assisting factories? Just doesnt make sense to me. Im glad its gone =) I like the new eco system, especially the part where massing engis and assisting just a few factories was removed.|||Why would you hate on factories assisting factories from FA? It was a great feature to manage unit composition easilly.|||I also liked factory assisting factories, although queues in SCom2 are generally so much simpler that its not a big deal.
My favorite was the fact that you could queue the occasional engineer or whatever in the 2nd factory, and it would build it and then automatically resume helping the first factory.
Makes it easy to build occasional stuff without needing too many clicks to stop and reqeueue a factory.|||FACTORIES ASSISTING FACTORIES?!
|||Who would've thought there was someone on this planet who actually resembles Wario?|||Factory assist was nice, sad to see that go. Like they said, it was especially nice to insert a unit (usually a transport or engineer) into the build order and get it right away.|||wneubert

Anyone Else not have anti nuke fire?

ever have a row of anti nukes fully loaded and someone launches a nuke at you and it doesn't fire??
not a boomberang turn around nuke....but a regular nuke and the anti nuke just doesn't fire and the nuke is clearly in its range because the nuke lands a few meters from it??
is this weird?...or what?|||Were the anti-missiles in the anti-nuke? You need to build them manually, they cost 450 mass and some energy each, and take a few minutes to build.|||FunkOff|||admin can close and delete this thread, launchers were empty.|||pdmasta

how to counter

It's pretty straight forward, my friend says I can't counter anything once I have commited to something. I.E. megalith rush when I have gone land rush, he kites my units or bombards my base. (I play uef) Basicly, what im asking is that if you could list everyone game winning tactic that might pin someone and tell how to counter it. Anything besides land blob rush. I would appreciate it. :)|||You do realize its not just strategy but also execution right? A transport drop can beat a tech rush... unless of course the tech rusher can kill the transport or the units inside. Etc etc etc.
Any good build allows for versatility... and usually starts with air, because fighter bombers are extremely versatile.|||Quote:|||dawumyster|||Yeah. Additionally, in 2vs2 or larger games.. a good team mate adapting well and/or helping you upon a time will be a crucial factor as well.|||FunkOff|||dawumyster|||If the map isn't too big, land rush should be easy to defeat experimental rush.
Maybe Attack more early?|||Depends a bit on the map. On the bigger maps, you can easily hold out until you get your expo. Then again, that gives the opponents time to prepare a counter.
(hey funkoff, Im happy for you, and ima let you finish, but we had one of the best counters OF ALL TIME! *refers to a certain monkeylord rush*)

An idea to help GPG track network troubles.

I am not sure if GPG has the infrastructure to do the following, but perhaps -
It might be worth it to release a patch that adds tracing / debugging code on every lobby disconnect / desync / game-drop. I don't want to go into details, but it seems like it might be worth-while to at least attempt to get some debugging / reporting code into the game. I definitely know this would give you a LOT of test cases. :) You just need a place to gather the data.
The question is, since this seem steam related, how much useful information can the SupCom2 app actually see and report? I don't know - maybe none.|||Good chance that such code is already in the game and just needs to be enabled.
However, it's looking like a steam issue that is not affecting the other steamworks games as much as supcom. GPG can only bug valve about it and this probably isn't top on valve's list.
Keeping in mind that I know very little about how modern networks work, I believe the problem relates to valve's relay servers. I'm trying to think of how we can for sure test this other than enabling port forwarding when you can't connect to someone's game.|||If it's the NAT traversal that isn't working, maybe we could circumvent this issue by opening and forwarding the correct ports in our routers? Does anyone know which ports steam and SupCom2 use?

Good job on AI improvements.

Nice work to Sorian and GPG to the AI tweaks in 1.24. The AI now attacks when it should, it takes advantage of weak areas of the opponent, and is much more challenging as an opponent, as well as useful as an ally. I can still beat a cheating AI on palms, but by a hair's margin.
It even coordinated amongst allies very well when I aeon acu rushed it. Very impressive.|||Indeed. I was happy to see that the AI no longer fidgets with it's units anymore, and in fact attacks rather aggressively. I like it.
I did notice once on Zeta that right outside my base he started to fidget once for about 20 seconds, but then pursued the attack. However, it only happened once in a span of 15 minutes.
Kudos to Sorian!!! If GPG used the Rep System, his would probably have the infinity sign at this point.|||Well done Sorian, the AI perform great. Thank you Sorian and GPG for this great game .
|||If this AI would micro, this forum would be filled with whining that the normal AI is too hard ^^
Great job on the fix|||Definite improvements on the AI. Great work Sorian. Your support effort has been simply outstanding.
Cheers |||I think the AI should take over for a disconnecting player in a team game as long as one human on that team remains, as was discussed previously. The AI, while still not as good as a competent human, would be better than losing outright all the units and accumulated research of the disconnecting player|||Simply put: the best overall artificial intelligence in a RTS ever. (IMHO) |||I did see one thing in an AI vs AI game, where an entire air blob of 10 AC-1Ks, a bunch of gunships and bombers were hovering for an extended period of time over an enemy sub. I think the AI thought it wanted to attack the sub, but obviously could not with the units on hand. When the AI player which controlled the sub was eliminated (and hence the sub as well), the air blob immediately left to kill an enemy base. Maybe something to tell the AI to ignore targets it can't hit, like gunships attempting to kill submerged submarines?|||I saw similar with the AI trying to use its gunships to engage my Darkenoid. Technically they should be able to shoot one another since they're both gunships, but the normal gun's gun can't traverse upwards enough to fire, but the AI doesn't seem to realise this.

When will this blatant, obvious cheater be dealt with?

http://steamcommunity.com/stats/Supreme ... ards/20549
His name, atm, is viaccess. He is now number 2 in rating, despite his frequent desyncs, disconnects and the hacking. Numerous players have posted replays showing his hacks. He has been around at least a month.
I would like to know if there is any intention to deal with him?|||I think We had no official response from gpg In the other thread dedicated to this hacker.
It would be nice to have the feedback of a Gpg employee on the matter.|||They can't get a bead on his steam ID from what I heard.|||1. Install Wireshark.
2. Play against him.
3. Check Wireshark logs... you'll now have his IP.
4. Hire botnet...
5. ???
6. Profit.
Right now, we're little children begging at an adult to solve all our problems because another kids is bean mean. People should take some ******* initiative for once and solve problems by themselves.|||I would say something, but since ranked is so infested with cheaters, DCers and gayrushers, i stopped caring. Thats a bad sign.|||Also, Funk... do you prefer Steam or GPGNet?|||BulletMagnet|||Good, for a moment I thought you were on the Steam bandwagon... was going to call you out for it, but kinda' can't now. ;p
Still, net his IP. Find stuff about him, post a few bullets or something to his family.|||Call me out, Bullet. Steam is a lot better for one reason: I don't have trouble connecting with 50% of players like I did in FA. I know I'm not the only one who had such problems with GPGNet. I think it's something to do with routers because Remmy got a new one and now we can play just fine, but I'm not sure what exactly.|||You guys are so dumb when it comes to Steam.
His Steam ID is:
STEAM_0:1:22997346
I made a thread in the VAC section of the Steam Forums
http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?p=18495543#post18495543

Oh and btw bullet, steam fanboy here
EDIT: Though, I feel that Steam functions better as a DRM/acheivment manager/store than as netcode for a game, since almost all games based through the Steam servers have issues (like lead and gold).
It seems to me that it would be better for GPG to develop their own multiplayer networking solution for K&C instead of relying on Steam's pretty bad support.|||He set his profile to private so we cannot see when he is online. XD|||His name is now "Mouse".
It would have been funny if he was stupid enough to accept friend requests
Edit - the name is "mouse" (no capital letter)|||Grim Tuesday|||They're still on holidays remember! |||GPG has seriously dropped the ball on this one. Way to let one person completely destroy the competitive side of your title. Great PR! |||RPhilMan1|||DeadMG|||BulletMagnet|||And begging and pleading is any better?|||Its at least better than hiring a botnet. People as sad as hackers/cheaters arent worth the effort. Theyre too sad for that.|||Grim Tuesday|||BulletMagnet|||Z32|||Why would you want to know where he lives? That's just creepy.|||Z32

A few questions...

I decided to buy Supreme Commander 2 last week after buying a new machine and then downloading the DLC to go with it.
Since then I have been playing 2v2's and 1v1's with my mates who are fairly new to SupCom 2 with us only having SupCom 1 experience. I also have been playing Ranked matches.
1. When playing Ranked matches I usually wait a long time to find a match. Does it matter if I click DLC on or not? Also is it affected with me living in Australia?
2. Played a Ranked Match this morning and was going really well with a decent matchup. Got the upper hand with my Weedoboths(I think thats how you spell them) and destroyed his base, everything except his ACU. I then started getting the Desync error come up every few seconds and ultimately had to quit and me losing rating. Why the error do you think? Is it common?
3. I love this game and with the increase waiting time for Ranked matches, how do I go about playing more games against other players?
These are the only questions I have at the moment. I love the amount of information in these forums for a new player like myself. Cheers in advance.|||DLC will mean you only get matched against those who also have DLC. Untick it and you'll play against those without (and/or those who turned it off).
Being in Australia means you'll have to be up at the early hours to play at peak times (trust me, I live near Newcastle). I've never played ranked Sup2, and am only going off experience with Sup1. So take my advice with a grain of salt.
The desync means that the each computer's interpretation of what the game should look like differs. Since there's no host or server, there's no authority to say who is right and who is wrong. When that happens, the game really should be abandoned but by some stroke of genius still counts as a valid game. I suggest you just go get a coffee and and a snack - hopefully your opponent hasn't done the same and decided to give up.|||Cheers for the speedy reply. Would more players have the DLC?
I just thought it was a bit suss that it started happening just as I destroyed his base. Maybe I am just paranoid.|||Scytale

Is there more information on "sacrifical healing"

This is in the Illuminate tech tree, probably got there with DLC, but I never played Illuminate much so it's remotely possible it's been there.
It allows a structure to be destroyed and heal nearby units. But I couldn't find anything on how much it would heal, or what range it had, or if it varied based on what was sacrificed. Anybody know anything?
I did a test, and for sure it was able to rush an experimental gantry, and it also was able to rush the construction of the experimental unit, a lot (5 pgens were sacrificed).
But the structures do cost mass and energy and you only get the same experimental, just faster, so it's probably not worth it.|||http://supcomdb.com/sc2/unitlist:20100901dlc1|||Actually, thats a very interesting strategy. One I never thought of!|||It's not exactly an easy tech to get unless you are planning to use TML.
9RP to speed up the production of anything that isn't exactly good math.
Might fit in the healing/shielding tech tree after nano-cloud. It would spice up a boring branch on the tree.
But yeah, a few of us are wondering if it's an exploit or a feature. Querried Eric. Hopefully he will get back to us.
Anyone remember when Headless asked if he could sacrifice engineers to speed up production. Wonder if he knows something like that is in the game.|||Bastilean|||Bastilean|||I can't find any specifics about the ability in the game files either. Calls a bunch of functions that makes sense such as: getUnits(range). But then just says run script and I have no clue where that is.|||Sounds pretty useful if you really, REALLY want that nuke now.|||wneubert|||I tried looking at the game files too.
I think it would have been better if they released a bit more info on the DLC units when they released them. I was watching a video about Buhbledow and it said the shields would not come back for 30 sec. I have no idea if that's true, but I would have assumed the shields would return in their default time.|||Not only did I look, before I asked, I looked again after he said it was there. I didn't see it. You got a problem with that, you got a problem.
There is a line in the middle saying "Sacrifice heal" but it has no info after it. Then at the end there is a line that says "Sacrifice (death): damage 1000, friendly damage: no".
Since it said damage, not heal, and it did not affect friendly either, I mistakenly assumed it was a destructive sacrifice like the Cybran have. I never play illuminate so I wasn't sure they had that or not.|||Nephylim|||I did some testing. Structures heal for the amount of damage listed in the DB (1k for pgens).
You can't "heal" a nuke missile being built (presumably because it's not a unit).
The healing directly feeds into the HP of the unit, so the 8000hp Wilfindja can be pumped out at ridiculous speeds if cost is no object.
The sac range is about two pgens wide. For example, a Loyalty Gun (2x2-pgen square) can be surrounded by 20 pgens (4x4 ring+2 on each side) that would be in range.
Speaking of which, the Loyalty Gun (18k health) is the most useful thing to use this with. Simply build the 18 pgens to instantly complete it before you have it researched to finish it instantly. It costs slightly less than a second gun, but that's a fair tradeoff.
There is also a bug. If you finish a structure with sac heal while it is not being assisted by a engy, it will be permanently stuck in the point of the building animation it was. You can have some invisible pgens and such. These structures cannot be finished afterwards, but they can be selected and ctrl-k'd. They also cannot do anything. Units finished instantly just pop out as normal (presumably because they're being built with a factory). To prevent this, just don't stop building with your engy and all will be fine.
Still needs testing: does sac heal heal your ally's stuff? Can bugged buildings be destroyed as normal (presumably they would)?|||The real trick is, using the middle pgens in your loyalty gun example to heal the production of something else!|||This is probably more useful for healing than rushing production. Even so, it seems pretty limited.|||wneubert|||It said damage of a thousand that does not affect friendly units, what I wanted to know was how much it healed friendly units. Get it?|||Usually a building under construction is being built by an engineer so the "bug" should be very rare.
Thank god you can't help a nuke, cause then people could use this as an exploit. As it is, any use of it seems like a perfectly reasonable tactic, not an exploit. I like they way they have it now. It's not really worth doing it to rush production, but if you do a heal during a fight in your base, all your factories in range will get a production boost too. However, I personally do not perfer battles going on in my base. They are rare and usually indicate I already lost.|||wneubert|||Haha, you quoted all the words, DAMAGE to UNFRIENDLY, then claimed it was obvious that this was friendly healing. Look up obvious in the dictionary. Your greater lookep skills should aid you.
And you got angry! Over this. Really?|||wneubert|||I did figure it out, just took a while. It was a bit confusing, and I made a mistake. The thread gernerated a lot of interesting ideas too.
One thing I thought of was you can rush as many projects at the same time as are within 20 yards. That would make it more useful. Still, there are not a lot of times I would give up mass for rushing production, I always need mass. Probably a heal of a big army is the best use.|||Xagar

Community service announcements.

- If you are hosting a game, please do not alt-tab out of SupCom2 back into Windows. This causes extreme lag in the lobby. When the host is alt-tabbed out, it can take more than 30 seconds for players to change positions, factions, team number, or color. This causes many newer players, and some vets, to grow frustrated quickly and leave. While this may be a bug, it has been present since the beginning of the game. There are no signs it will go away any time soon.
- If you are in a game lobby, but are not the host, do not bother sending invites to that game. The links you send will not work. If you wish for a friend to join, send them a private message with the game title.
- For God's sake, please mention all exclusions in the title.
- Don't be in a hurry to launch the game after the 8th player joins in a 4v4. You only increase the chance of a failed launch, or worse, a drop in-game. GPG has stated tha it is best to let connections "settle" with each other for a few seconds before launching. Once every one is in the game, it is best to ask "Does anyone see a 0 ping to anyone besides themselves?" If the answer is yes, have them click test ping several times. If that does not work, one or more of them may need to try:
- Rejoining the lobby
- Restarting Supcom2 and/or Steam
If you try to launch with 2 or more people having 0 ping to each other, the launch will hang. If this happens, hit Alt-F4, then click 'No' to get back to the lobby screen. Then, as a safety precaution, change some setting in the exclusions list to automatically cause all players to unready. (Then change it back.)
- Don't rush people to ready up who just joined. Ever. I mean EVER. This one really burns me up. People need time to note the factions of their opponents and allies, the slot lineup, they need time to read exclusions, determine assass vs. supremacy, and then make a decision on their faction. If you waited three minutes for the first six people to join, you can sure as hell wait another 15 seconds for the last one to get settled and check in. One last time for the 12-year-olds out there: *DON'T EVER RUSH RECENT JOINERS TO READY. IT'S RUDE AND SERVES NO PURPOSE.*|||Sometimes exclusions change in game. For example, I'm hosting a game right now and one guy wants no nukes |||Great advice Vax....
Listen up people =]|||+1|||I agree, everybody should take this into consideration
+1|||dawumyster|||dawumyster|||BLaNKMiND

Hotkeys

If any of these are already in the game, tell me. Otherwise, just post requests you might have.
-Fire type! (Hold fire, ground fire, etc.)
-DLC unit hotkeys
-Have build mode toggle on, so that you don't have to keep clicking it.
-Repeat build
-BE ABLE TO REMAP THESE KEYS|||Also I am interested to know the hotkeys for Mass Extractors, power gens etc|||Press b to enter build mode. Then just press the hotkey for the appropriate building. I'm not a big fan of the way hotkeys are currently layed out, and in some cases not even there. There definitely needs to be a ground fire hotkey. There is a button to cycle through your fire types, but it's not within the reach of either hand while playing. Even as a big SupCom 2 fan, I have to say, Starcraft 2 did their hotkeys right.|||I would like the buildings in build mode to be automatically queued, So I dont need to hold shift and press the hotkeys to lay them down.
Simply press the M hotkey, Lay down 2 mass extractors with left click, then exit the mass extractor Building sequence by right clicking. No shift needed.|||That would be awesome, seems a bit of a pain for me to press shift and the hotkey every single time.|||Scytale

Looking for a clan/mentor

Hi All,
I'm new to SC2 and I'm just looking for a large clan/mentor to help me improve in the game. Send me a message if you know of one. I'm almost 30 so a group of older gamers is probably more my style. Thanks!
-Neil|||Well, you could join BoW. We are a sub-clan of the biggest clan (EdC), but you don't have to be as l33t to get in.|||Giblien|||Giblien|||I would pair you up (I'm the guy in the link in Baron's post) but you are better off going on some TS and Vent servers and pestering people there to help you :)
The community mentoring program seems to have stopped working as none of the mentors have gotten back to me asking for more mentees..........
EDIT: Give this guy a PM: http://www.gamereplays.org/community/in ... ser=154869
He might be interested.|||TheWord|||It's fine if you are legitimately busy, but a few just can't be arsed........
Thats why it is effectively closed now as a mentoring program. If interest peaks again though I'll start another program.

Warrior Nation announcement

I thought after my Clan-mate WNxERIC posted a short introduction of our Clan Warrior Nation it is time for something more spectacular

I'm happy to announce:
Clan Warrior Nation (WNx): Recruiting Active & Friendly Members!

Clan Warrior Nation is pleased to inform you that we are currently recruiting active and friendly players to our family type environment. Some things to consider before contacting one of the officers are the following:

• Skill Level: Any skill level is allowed to join. There are no restrictions in this area.
• Time Zone: Any time zone is allowed to join. We have players both from NA and EU to accommodate your play times.
• Primary Language: English. Everyone speaks English here so this would only benefit yourself if you can too.
• Age: We consider anyone 13+, but we prefer somewhere around 15+. A number doesn't always mean that person is mature and maturity is a quality we deeply care about in our clan.
• Number of Players: Unlimited. We need fresh faces to populate our clan and forums once again. Officer positions are available if you show promise so there is a lot of room for advancement in the clan for anyone who likes tiered structure.
• Forums: We require all of our members to be active on forums. This is where we announce our Game Nights, special clan activities, etc. So it is vital that you always pay attention to these.

How To Go About Joining!
Joining our clan is quite a simple process that doesn't take long either.
Click the link below and carefully read what the page shows. This describes what our clan values and what we require our members to abide by. Before you begin registration though please contact one of the officer below so that we can vouch for your account to be accepted.
http://warriornation.net/join.php
Contacts
Section Leader
Steam - Zeed
Xfire - wnxzeed
MSN - wkz@hotmail.com
Warrior Nation forums - WNxZeed
Officers
Steam - DO_x2
Xfire - gekklon
Warrior Nation forums - WNxGekko
Warrior Nation Admin
Xfire - WNxERIC
MSN - eke92003@yahoo.com
Aim - Eric92005
Email - eke92003@yahoo.com
WarriorNation Forums - WNxERIC
PROS

• TS3 server
• Opportunity for advancement in ranks
• Casual and fun community
• Weekly Game Nights/fun activities!

Our personal forums on the website can be located here: http://warriornation.net/Forum/forumdisplay.php?f=1978
I advise anyone who is interested in joining our family that you first read and look over our LAWS and POLICIES.|||Awesome this is great news, more clan activity is just what this game needs. :)|||Didn't you guys have an allegiance division? I remember playing either with or against some WN guys when I played that YEARS ago.|||KorJax

GPG - Please allow ACU assist to override any current assist

There is something that is just as annoying as it is helpful. If an idle engineer, or upgraded UEF PGEN with the engineering capability, is near an unfinished or damaged structure, it automatically begins repair or continues construction of the structure / unit.
This can be extremely annoying, because it locks out the ACU from assisting. In close quarters, it can be difficult to tell which unit is doing the repairing in order to turn it off. With UEF pgens, when you turn off one, another just takes over before you get the chance to have the ACU assist.
When you're in the heat of battle, especially late game base spamming, this is the last thing you have the time to deal with. Here's what should be done instead.
The game should internally distinguish between an auto-assist vs. a user-assigned manual assist. A user-assigned manual assist should ALWAYS over-ride an auto-assist. I should only have to tell my ACU to repair or continue construction of something, and the other engineer or PGEN should *automatically* stop its repair/construction of said structure/unit.
Anyone else agree?|||+1|||Hmm.. not that sure on that annoying factor you the OP are exposing on here.
Any real battle examples?.|||Your aa tower is being brought down by gunships trying to snipe you. Your brave engineer takes it upon himself to repair it on his own. Your commander refuses to repair it while the engineer does. You waste the valuable few seconds you have trying to get your engineer to do something else, and then your commander to repair it. I've definitely had moments like that in real games. You can work around this by giving engineers orders before they start to repair things you don't want them to, but I would appreciate the commander taking priority in all repairs.|||Ok, I buy it!. Anyway, the ACU is you. So..
+1
Subsequently, I'd like to have ACUs overriding engineers build queues as well.|||In SupCom1 this was never a problem since building stuff and repairing always stacked (if you had the resources) which is how it should have been in this game. But this would be better than nothing at least, certainly better than it is now.|||_PINK|||If you tell your commander to assist the building in question, and then select the eng/P-gen and press "s" to make it stop, I believe the ACU will begin repairing/building even if there are other engs near.|||good idea, but there are more important things to change. Like balancing^^|||VoW-Kryo|||Data_machine|||VoW-Kryo|||FunkOff|||Nephylim|||+1, excellent suggestion. Would really help UEF with repairgens.

I cant beat the AI on way station zeta.

Yep.
Every time I just get steamrolled. Whether I try a MML rush running up the side to destroy some buildings, go all out tanks, go defensive with lots of PD, light artillary and shields. No matter what I do i just get steamrolled!
The AI is hard (i know, not even cheating yet) and I can beat the hard AI on almost every other map I try.
Whats the story? |||Congrats Sorian! |||I actually wonder is sorian as good at the game as his AI is? |||wondering if he can beat you if he receives 60% extra income? |||wobbles-grogan|||wobbles-grogan|||FunkOff|||My problem is with AI Cheater on small maps, i can beat it on other big maps, with defending my tiny little small base :) and then teleport to his...
But small with ai cheater is really problem.
I tried about nearly 10 times and no success.
What i do is(btw im picking random race for me, and random face for him etc. everything is default) build lots of anti air(depends on my race) for example if im united earth forces i research anti air for research stations/mass extractors etc.
Also i defend myself with buildings always, dont using units.
And i also get some land army
Cheater is usually comes with little army and air tranports, i destroy transports with anti air etc.
But like in 20-30-40 minutes of game, he got experimentals etc. and comes to me with big land army and i die.
What to do ?|||Quote:|||0oPx0|||Generally speaking, ai's regardless of difficulty are weakest earlygame and most vulnerable to early aggression (so long as you don't go all-in). The inability to micro hurts them when they've only got a few units at their disposal and not legions of them, and the cheating advantages the ai gets expands the gap between you 2 the longer the game drags on for.
IIRC, Zeta is a 2v2 map, so you'd probably be best derved going air first and starting with some early air raiding and mex sniping. Moving your comm forward early on and creeping pd aggressively is also extremely effective against the ai.
Try a comrush if you're looking for lols.|||Basically any cheese will beat the AI. Gunship snipe, rushing to AC-1000, TMLs, ACU tech, megalith rush.... any high tech thing quickly will beat hard AI. All you have to do is defend against his tank spam.|||Z32|||Nephylim|||FunkOff|||Col. Jessep|||You have to out-produce the AI and put pressure on early. If you let the AI tech up and build experimentals without any land force yourself you will be defeated.
I've noticed in SupCom2 that an overwhelming land force will always defeat a turtler. Major experimentals just crush point defense.
The trick is to do a hybrid build - turtle up at the chokepoints while making a harass force. You must prevent the AI from ever building any experimental gantries. If you are not at the AI's doorstep then you will be overrun.
And like others have mentioned, you have to use strategies or advantages that the AI itself may not be smart enough to do or counter. Basically out-think the AI and you will win.

[Bug] Naval XP cost affected by building cost reduction

Naval XPs' cost are affected by structure training and the ACU upgrade that reduces "building cost" by 15%.
It seems fairly obvious how the bug happens.|||cost reduction affects whatever engineers/ACU build.
noticed that a while ago. don't think it is a bug though.|||Naval experimentals are pretty much useless... Why bother fixing this (if its even an oversight) if its actually good?|||Working as intended IMO.
These XPs do not benefit from structure veterancy.|||Probably the true "bug" is that the descriptions in the game do not make it clear that this is possible.|||Bastilean|||Well, naval XPs are the only ones without gantries... so they don't get the normal cost reductions of gantry vet. IMO, it's fine.
Also, naval XPs are (pretty much) useless.|||I think it's pretty clear naval experimentals aren't supposed to have their cost decreased by training in a completely different upgrade tree.|||Shrug, as a programmer, it seems pretty logical to me.
ACU/Engy build cost reductions apply to things that ACU/Engys build directly.
So does Structure Training.
Naval Experimentals are things ACU/Engys build directly, in a similar manner to structures.
To exempt them, you'd need to write a special case that checks to see if the ACU/Eng is building a naval experimental and not a structure, and if so, don't apply the discount.
Which isn't difficult or complex at all, but it's a special case - applying the discount without exceptions is more logical to me as a programmer ;)|||Zeech, you pretty much repeated what I said
Thats my reasoning for why its probably intended|||Its my reasoning for why it makes logical sense to a programmer. I dont care what you said ;)|||I think the game balance reason of not getting gantry vet justifies it enough.|||Totally offtopic, but couldnt resist..
AdmiralZeech

new patch out today

Hi,
Steam just finished downloading a new SC2 patch. 6pm EST, NY.
I cannot find any patch notes though.
Anyone has a clue where to find them? Nothing on steam or the forum.
Patch size was 19.6 MB.|||Just a fix to the executable for those players that were unable to start the game after 1.24.|||Oh ok,
thx for the quick answer. :)

Bug in Cybran Final Mission

So, I'm on the final mission and encountered the bug. Because this is the final mission, please be wary of spoilers.
I destroyed the first power coil to my immediate left, and a cutscene initiated. I heard Ivan say something like "this is not good", and then everything just paused. As in, the game was running, the simulation was running (my units got attacked) but I could not do anything. The cutscene black bars were present and the UI was not. did not return, had to close the application manually.
If its any help, I think I might have destroyed the power coil with an air unit, a Soul Ripper, despite Brackman saying I needed to get under the shield.|||That shouldnt matter, because air units can get under the shield as well... weird...|||I played it again, and it didnt happen this time. But I made sure to keep the soul rippers away just in case.

Why supcom2 > supcom1

Now Supcom2 has become a mature RTS I would like to know how we all compare it to Supcom1.
Choose your options based on whats important too you from either 1 or 2.
You may notice my bias so please suggest other poll options and I will (possibly) add.|||Modding and mapping support are essential for me.
I don't need 4 or 6 tanks but more than one would be nice. And the old FA research system is way better because you can actually scout what your opponent plans. Just limit the engy assist and it is fine.
More poll options should be:
FA - I like that map control and expansion is important.
FA - I want a game that stays interesting for a long time.|||Mod support and map editor are what FA did right/better. Supcom 2 wins in all other fields.|||FunkOff|||Supcom 1/FA had the better idea, but supcom 2 was implemented better.
I still like FA more, because it was more fun to play, and things like mass-assisting, unit diversity and mod support helped it in that respect. Though I admit, as a game, supcom 2 works better, it's still not as fun for me.|||I actually moved back to FA after playing supcom2 for like 3 or more months.
Was a complex decision, of course map editor, balancing and stuff is important, but i think the main reason for that was FA feels like im waging a real deal war out there.|||I bought SupCom2 and the Infinite War battle pack when the steam special was on. I'm actually pretty happy with it, but I do think they should have released it in that state, plus mod support. If they released it with the maps and experimentals that it has with the DLC, it would have got much better reviews. But they rushed it out for whatever reason, which obviously hurt sales and review scores. You live and learn I suppose.
I do think its a much more playable game than SupCom 1. Much easier to engage in, much easier to just pick and play. Thats what it was designed for I suppose. Same epic scale, no masters degree required. I can actually play the game without having to micro manage my mexes to improve their output. Teching up is far easier, and I actually like the research tree. It gives a way to simulate a progression to T3 without actually having separate tiers. The one problem is that experimentals might start getting outclassed by regular units once they are fully upgraded. I'm guessing here though.
The campaign has more personality than the first one, but its writing is too cheesy. Plus I hate how slowly things are unlocked - the first 4 missions all you have is basic units, then in the last two missions suddenly everything becomes unlocked.|||Col. Jessep|||It's easy. Supcom: FA is the best of all. Supcom 1 had an awful UI and awful balance. Supcom 2 doesn't feel like an RTS at all, it feels like I am pushing lego around on the bedroom carpet with my 6 year old brother. Feels so cheap, like all the units are incredibly flimsy and made in China. Oh, and almost all of the realism has gone (Instant upgrades in the middle of battle, I mean, come ON).
FA will rule. Forever.
PS: At least until we see KnC |||Mr Pinguin|||BulletMagnet|||Mr Pinguin|||I thought the mex. upgrades missing from Sup2 was worth of a poll option.
Personally, I like the idea of building targets. It's far more strategic than having everything of equal value and capable of equal things.|||I'm with duncane on this one. The whole mex upgrade thing was very tired and required a lot of micro. Engy assisting is a pity, but I realize why they did it - in this economy model, things are paid for as soon as construction begins. That would mean there would be no drawback to engy assisting, you could pump things out as quickly as you get mass in to make them.
Mass would your constraint, so I suppose what would happen is that you would produce a unit in a few seconds, and then have to do nothing for a while until your mass builds up again. So not entirely unbalanced then, but it could make experimental rushes quicker and more dangerous. At least build times have been reduced which makes up for the lack of assist.
The other thing I like is the general pace of the game - its a lot easier and quicker to get to even the most expensive experimental units. Once you have unlocked them via RP, they are (compared to SC1) quick and cheap to build. Whats the point of putting a Paragon in the game if they never get built?|||IMO Research is better than tiers. not because of how is is made, or how logical or "lifelike" it is or anything, but because of the result. if you make a mistake - you suffer. that is the weight of choice that was nearly absent in SupCom1/FA. there was counter for anything in every field for every race. no matter if you focus air, land or navy, each of them has counters for every type of weapon enemy can throw at you, so it is only matter of performance, not a strategic thinking. at least it is not what i think "strategic thinking" is|||FunkOff|||BulletMagnet|||Ancalagon|||Unneccessary eco micro, less interesting 1v1 metagame, pathfinding umpteen times worse.|||spuddyt|||duncane|||duncane|||I like research because it means T1 units never become useless. Also, it means I never have to build a T1 factory, upgrade it, and then upgrade it again to build units. In SC2, I just build factories and they can pump out my upgraded units. Much simpler, lets me focus on other things.
I'm also a fan of upgrades in games, in general. I dont know why.
I suppose it does create the problem that you cant tell where an opponent has spent his RP. If I see a horde of rockheads heading my way, are they fully upgraded, or just a waste of mass? On the other hand, in FA, if I see monkeylords heading my way, I know exactly how dangerous they are.
But I suppose to spend mass on something you havent spent RP on would be a waste. The only thing you might do is build the units while you are still getting RP to upgrade them, in which they would not be fully upgraded.|||For me:
SCom2 Pros:
- Nicer weapon effects and explosions for normal units.
- Runs much better on my PC.
- No mex/factory upgrades
- Gameplay favours many factories to be built
SCom2 Cons:
- Requires unit zigzagging & other unit micro tricks
- UI is unsatisfactory
- No modding to fix the UI.

SCFA Pros:
- Better sense of scale when looking at battles.
- Large weapon effects (nukes, T4 beams) are nicer.
- UI modding available, thus UI is better.
- Replay & Mod Vault.

SCFA Cons:
- I don't like mex/factory upgrades.
- Balance & battles should be focused mostly on T2, but they're not.
- Runs poorly on my PC.

----------------------
There's only a couple of things that would have made SCom2 absolutely better than SCFA for me. I'm very bitter that, as it stands, both things have equal amounts of good & bad, making me unhappy that I have to choose.|||On a final note, something I meant to originally say.
GPG, and most of this here forum, seems to have one thing cocked up;

interpreting symptoms of problems as problems.

The flux economy was never the problem... the exponential growth of said economy as you tech'ed up was the problem. Of course, knee-jerk reactions are what causes drastic, and unneeded, changes to be made. But nobody fixes broken things any more, we just throw them out and replace them wholesale and repeat that when we realise it's broken too.
Ancalagon

uef gunships and barrel upgrade

why in some supcom reviews does it say that the uef have an early gunship when it costs just as much to get as every other faction? Why does the triple extra barrel upgrade cost so much, even though they lower the damage by about half, so it turns out to be somewhere about 10-20 % better?|||Balance Patches.
Mike|||so can you explain why it's so expensive and why it would be balanced if aeon get cheap, quick, and high damage upgrades? Or is that because Uef have extra barrel and damage. It's 35% for uef right? If it is, then it seems balanced, I just dont know why It's such an expensive upgrade for so little|||Uhh isn't stacked barrels double damage?|||Xagar|||Stacked barrels multiplies with other damage boosts rather than add. If you research 2 levels of training you gain 10%+10%=20% firepower. Stacked barrels multiplies the current firepower (120% with lvl 2 training) with a certain factor (1.2 or something like that, beefing it up to say 1.2*1.2 = 144%). That's its true power.|||Same can be said of the RoF upgrades. There's a reason that Renegades become devastating once they get that 30% RoF upgrade stacked with that 35% damage upgrade. That, without training, is a 75.5% increase in firepower.
Naval stacked gauss cannons stack with training in much the same way. A posiedon with stacked cannons and all training has three times the firepower of an unupgraded posiedon.|||As it is the barrel upgrade isn't worth it until you have bought the 3rd training upgrade
But as it is the training upgrades are almost all better than it
I'm pretty sure the damage ratio is 1.25
However if you go with full training you should, in theory, still win until after you get the 5th training because Double Barrel scales Much better than no double barrel
Dunno if that makes sense but XD|||_Golgoth_|||In fact, the Aeon are the only faction without damage multipliers on their land units. In the air they have scorch. The thing that makes up for it is extra health/regen multipliers: Shields + regen boost combined with bodabooms. That makes for an awesome combo. And works on ALL their land units, not just tanks/mobile arty (shotjas?)|||Nephylim|||Instead of a multiplier we get an extra damage upgrade, but it sucks because you have to waste 7 rp on Wilfindjas first.|||yucon|||Personally, I'll keep my bodabooms over stacked gauss cannons, the extra regen, staked with shielding and even more regen from research is ideal against artillery, they completely trump that P-shield nonsense. Damage II is a bit of a waste of time though. 7RP for 25% is steep enough as it is, 7 more RP to go through the Wilfindja is absurd.
To think, there was a time where you had to go through all of that and then come up with 15 more to get a UC.
Broadswords are as good as any other gunship when you factor in those crazy cost and build time researches you can get for them. The other two gunships make up for it with absurd durability (Vulthoo) or just more gun (renegade).|||Manta|||Vleessjuu

Please add a hotkey for repeat queue

Please?|||What resolution do you play at?
Edit: If you're playing at 1680x1050 or 1920x1080, you're welcome to try using this:
SC2_RepeatBuild.exe(Compiled AutoHotKey Macro, Ctrl-R)
If you're wary of running random .exe files, install AutoHotKey and load the script by itself:
SC2_RepeatBuild.ahk
A real hotkey would be a lot nicer though.|||I asked for this on the day of release of SCom2. I continued to ask for it. I emailed CT about it.
Heck, it was even missing in SCom1, and I had to write/adapt the GAZ_UI mod to add it in. It was a few minutes of coding.
I believe there is some evil force within GPG conspiring to eternally keep this hotkey out of the SupCom franchise. There's simply no other explanation for why such a fundamental but trivial thing was never added. Someone is simply racist against Repeat Build Hotkeys.|||I still press R sometimes and produce an extra loyalist |||Oh yeah, AHK...I remember that that exists.
Thanks.|||Xagar|||I hope they at least make the firing mode cycle hotkey set everyone as the same firing mode if they're on different modes. Cycling each one through their individual firing mode is not useful.|||WANT GROUND FIRE BUTTON!|||UncertainCat|||Nephylim|||CerusVI|||Nephylim|||SyDaemon

Where does nuke and anti nuke funding come from????

HI,
Hopefully a GPG employee will know this..
I know where the funding comes from to build the nuke silos and anti nuke silos...but what pool of cash does the nuke missile and anti nuke missile come from?
Does it come from the same pool that you stipulate for the actual silo structure? Does it pull it from 'all'? or ..
help!|||You should clarify that this is an AI-related question. I was confused at first but realized you were talking about the different "resource buckets" Sorian talked about. Some people may not be as familiar with that.|||can an admin delete this thread, i got the answer i needed, thanks!|||Why don't you share the answer for the rest of us that are curious as well?

conventional uef

I can't see how uef are supposed to be so conventional from looking at the stats of most of the units. yes there are little things here and there like reliable shields and way experimentals look, things like that, but when i look at the stats, it doesn't seem that way. Maybe im wrong but when i asked silver commander he said: "well.. maybe its not the stats but how you use them" That seems like what you should do if you are cybran. like maybe microing from uef tank shots with fast loyalists. can somebody explain.|||Clarify what you're asking us to explain.|||I thought they was conventional because they use Shells & bullets rather than Lazorz & energy weapons.|||Well they don't really employ any real trickery. They kinda take the TF2 engineer approach to things:
"Use a gun, and if that don't work, use more gun."
Since that's essentially 45% of all of their upgrades. Another 45% is armour improvements.|||LayZboy

cicadas

why do cicadas stealth somthing from vision and radar? you could just sneak into the enemy base and blow up stuff with a bomb bouncer? This has happened to me in 1v1's before. less than 20 minutes into the game.|||kill the cicada?|||Thats the whole point of cicadas?
You kill the cicada, instead of what is under it first.
EDIT: NINJAAAAAAAAAAAAAS|||well i couldn't see it|||smugger|||Cicadas can't hide other Cicadas.|||all i know is,my stuff just started randomly blowing up, and he said cicada with bomb bouncer.|||smugger|||Next time save the replay.|||Next time just watch the damn replay. It'd show you what was hidden.

Connection lost

So it seems for me and most of the people i play with are not able to play online for the last 3 days.
the usual lobbey 0 ping bug is happening a lot more, and if we do get a game started, people lose con to each other ingame. when i lose con to someone i see their acu blow up and the game freezes. i can still type in chat, but i can not see what the person i have lost con to is typing... all the other players can see both out text.
The game will only resume if one of the players who has lost con leaves the game (this used to happen in Demigod too).
as i siad this extreme connection loss has only happened about 3 days ago and is affecting over 90% of my games. i am on teamspeak with over 10 other players from different countries and they are getting exactlly the same problem.
Are you aware of the new extreme disconnects GPG ?|||OMG, this started happening to me this weekend too! I thought it was something up with my ISP. I was getting better pings and connections to people in Russia and Europe than friends in the same city as me, with frequent disconnects to one other person in game and nil pings. Sometimes the 0 pings sorts itself if you rejoin a few times and spam test ping, but you're usually in for a crappy game. I thought it had something to do with NAT traversal. Glad to see I'm not the only one. Sad thing is once this happens to you a few times, people will not want to play with you =/|||+1 to sudden increase in not being able to connect to people.
Maybe it's steam, maybe it's the fact that my face is so horrible that it broke the internet but it could also be the fact that GPG does not know how to make a proper multiplayer lobby.|||+1 to Word's face being the source of the problem.|||TheWord|||sorian|||TheWord|||Quote:|||I couldn't connect to any of Blanks games. I always got the message "Unable to join game", even after restarting steam and trying different ways to join the game. I never had this before, so I suspect this is a Steam issue.
OTOH: If it's just Blank it could also be a problem with his ISP. Some ISPs use traffic shaping during weekends and other high traffic periods, which can negatively affect gaming.|||If that was the case, then close to everyone would be experiencing this problem. My buddy, who is using the same ISP as me, in the same city, is not experiencing any problems. I know it's not my computer because I've tested it on multiple computers. So far I can't pin this down. I've had no problems playing other games online, however - L4D2 (steam), Bad Company, ect.
Yes, when this happened to me, select people (my buddy) were not able to connect to games I hosted also.
I remember windows 7 getting updated a few days ago. It's a stretch...
QUESTION TO GPG: How does supcom handle NAT traversal and connection handshakes and does it use a proxy when 2 clients can't establish a connection with one another? Or does that just result in the nil ping stuff that we've been seeing?|||Like i siad neph, it has only been this extreme in the last few days, before we got around the 0 ping bug just by rejoining several times.
Its more the disconnects while playing which are game breaking.
For example....
I played a 2v2 with pulse today, the zero ping bug in the lobby was not as present as usual (some people joining got it, but the ones who didnt kept a stable ping) and we started the game... As soon as the game started i lost connection to Pulse, Pulse left and I carried on, me versus 2 others.
5 mins later one of my opponents lost con to me. he left and the game carried on... 15 minutes later the other guys loses con to me and i get a victory.
Anyone who i have talked to that has played in the last few days has been getting this.
Has anyone not been getting these issues today or yesterday ?|||Im glad its not just me - I though I was going crazy!
Even if I can get into a game it Desynchronize with in 2 mins.
If it is a steam problem has anyone reported it?|||+1 to this thread.|||New patch is available.|||New patch just increases the window from 4 to 8 seconds, meaning that there should be less nil pings but won't fix people disconnecting from each other mid game.|||Its a start...
As soon as people realize COD7 is a shitty game, steam will act properly again |||I've not been booted from lobbies any more than usual, but I see the other guys constantly DC'ing... And yeah, I think the spike in issues corresponds with blackops' release, so it is probably something to do with server load. And word, your face, your mum, your mum's face and your mum's friend's niece's bondsman's cousin's dog's face. And don't diss sorian wanker >.>|||Yes, Steam had a lot of issues lately with connection facilitation. Exact reason is still unknown, but in the last 2 weeks or so it happened around every 3rd day for around 1 hour at different times of the day. Other games that use SteamWorks for connection facilitation were affected too, not just Supreme Commander 2.|||Spooky|||Spooky|||BulletMagnet|||Oh dear. Steamworks might be heading the way of Microsoftworks...
Although I thought L4D2 uses it and I've had little problems playing that. Also doesn't explain how my buddy on the same ISP in the same city is having no problems. More elaboration would be nice.|||Well, I dont seem to have any trouble... I played like 10 games today, none of these problems occured. May be lucky, but still...
I did get a random desync message, but it was only one so no bad things happened.|||EDIT: Just saw Spooky's post after writing this. Thanks for the update!
I have to jump in this thread.
The connectivity problems are so rampant now it makes me feel like not playing this game anymore.
I'm not accusing the patch of breaking anything, but connectivity problems are HORRIBLE for me right now. Maybe it's the problems from the past week just getting worse, but I just spent 20 minutes trying to get a game, and at least 4 individuals trying to join that game had 0 ping to multiple players. Restarting SupCom2 and Steam did not help. Having different people try and host didn't help. I've been seeing more problems in the lobbies, and more disconnects in game. I'm not saying it's GPG or Steam or the patch.
I *do* know that many people I know are having an increased number of issues, both in-lobby and in-game disconnects. I would say that right now, I am only seeing 1 in THREE 4v4s successfully get beyond the lobby. Once in game, there's about a 50% chance som kind of disconnect or de-sync will occur.
I'm not blaming anyone, but this problem REALLY SUCKS, AND IS RUINING THE GAME. Hopefully someone in-the-know can let us know what might be going on.
For what it's worth, whenever I have issues, it's usually with specific individuals for a given period of time. The next day, if I have issues, it will probably be with different people, but the problems will remain with that set of new people for at least the next few hours.|||I'm entering many servers that are giving me 0 ping to everybody. It's frustrating the hell outta me.

ranked fake disconects

about half of my 1v1 games i get DC'ed. Yet i can jump right back into a game. So i have obviously have not lost connection, But it still counts it as a loss. This wouldn't be a problem if it wasn't so frequent.|||Yes, you just DCd on me you git! -_-
Nah im sure you didnt do that on purpose, it still was annoying...|||Steam servers.|||well i can't do 1v1 ranked until its fixed, it happens on more than just 1v1, but it seems to happen the most there|||smugger|||yes im sure, and i have never played kyro anyway.

Bug: Boomerang nullifies Anti-Nuke silo

Boomerang vs Anti-Nuke conflict. This bug is intermittent but frequent enough that it should be looked at.
I have witnessed the same bug happen to me and to other Cybran players during different matches:
Basically, if you have a Boomerang built in the vicinity of one or more Anti-Nuke silos (and you have ample Boomerang missiles AND lots of Anti-Nuke missiles built and ready)... for some reason, any Nuke missile that does NOT get redirected by the boomerang can enter your anti-nuke zone without being detected... which has the rather odd effect of landing directly into your fully anti-nuke protected base untouched doing game-changing damage.
It's not clear to me why the Anti-Nuke missiles aren't firing at the Nuke but it appears to have something to do with the presence of the boomerang because when there is no Boomerang every Anti-Nuke silo works works correctly as it should.
And just so you know: YES, the Nuke is DEFINITELY landing almost centre-spot in my Anti-Nuke radius and to make matters worse, it doesn't matter how many Anti-Nuke silos you have built (on the last occassion I had 4 Antinuke silos and 3 Boomerangs)... 4 Nukes got shot at me, the 3 Boomerangs intercepted 3 of the Nukes (sending 1 back and 2 into space) and the remaining Nuke just floated straight into the centre of my base while all 4 of my Anti-nukes (all within range) failed to pick it up.
It's as though there's some kind of control or attribute in the anti-nuke which gets nullified by the use of one or more Boomerangs.
I'm guessing that the DLC pack wasn't fully tested before release because the Boomerang has other problems as well (ie. it often redirects nukes into space instead of the opposing player). Overall, these bugs defeat the purpose of using the Boomerang - it would be nice if the developers at GPG could do a little more testing as these issues are very easy to replicate.|||The redirect to space bug is when the opposing player self-destructs the nuke launcher before the nuke hits. The nuke is redirected to the launcher, but if the launcher does not exist at the time of redirection, it is redirected into space.|||What x-cubed said in reference to the space thing is true. As for the nukes landing where you have anti nukes silos, did they have missiles in them? I'm only asking because I never experienced that issue. If you still have the replay, or can recreate it and save the replay, can you post it so we can look at it?|||You can just turn your anti nukes off (hold fire) until the boomerang had done it's job, then turn your antis on.|||This seems like a bug where the boomerang has to target more than one nuke coming at it. I'm guessing that the all anti-nukes puts a "lock" on incoming nukes when they are firing at it so other antinukes cannot target it and antimissles are not wasted. Thus, if the boomerang's "lock" code was just copied from the antinukes, it probably over its head in what it can handle, saying "I got this" to nukes that actually will overwhelm its RoF.
...Just guessin'|||Quote:|||sovietpride|||Lol |||You could be right dawumyster,
Only the GPG Devs can tell us how the Boomerangs attributes are conflicting with the Anti-Nukes but it's definitely an issue that renders the simultaneous use of both Boomerangs and Anti-Nukes useless when playing against more adept players or Hard computer opponents (which is always a multi-nuke fest).
As for your suggestion (TheWord) to turn anti-nukes off (hold fire) until the boomerange has done it's job - this is something I've not tried and I guess if I was desperate enough to keep playing Supcom2 I'd try this and any other workaround I can think of. However, I'm giving Supcom2 a break until the GPG Dev team fix some of the DLC bugs which I think are a direct result of poor (or possibly even non-existant) secondary testing. Come on guys - I'm happy to pay for new content but it needs to work!!!|||Not sure about this bug - ask funk. I had antis + boomerangs working just fine next to each other... (under a large nuclear storm)|||sovietpride|||I'd rather not get this bug thread confused with a discussion about whether or not Boomerangs are OP etc... that's not the point of my post.
I used the words 'intermittent but frequent' because on previous occassions everything has worked correctly and yet, it recent times (the last 3 games I've played) it has not.
My brother kept a recording of the last game where it happened so I'm going to ask him to get it posted up here - hopefully the GPG Devs will take a look at this issue and get it resolved soon |||Post the replay. www.gamereplays.org As they say, REPLAY OR IT DIDN'T HAPPEN|||Less the replay or it didn't happen, but get the replay, so GPG can get a look at it and fix it.
My post was that i've yet to encounter this PARTICULAR bug. (boomerang missiles going into space for a lap around the planet is anotherone...)|||Here is the replay in question:
(First attack is 30mins in.)
http://www.gamereplays.org/supremecomma ... =tips#disc
Video/Avi's:
("Right-Click" & "Save As")
1) https://personalbucketstorage.s3.amazon ... -49-25.avi
2) https://personalbucketstorage.s3.amazon ... -13-93.avi
He had four anti-nukes with two nukes built (per silo) when the first one got through. In the second attack (during the same match,) two of the nukes are boomeranged(?) into space but the third still somewhow gets through the remaining three anti-nuke silos!
It's definitely a bug...
Perhaps all those shield generators prevented the nuke from launching? |||Question to GPG Devs: Can we get an estimated release date for the patch that will include the fixes to the Boomerang bugs please?...|||Br41n|||FunkOff|||D1gN1tY has mentioned (in a previous post,) that he has been following the franchise since before it was even called "Supreme Commander". So I would expect him to know the difference between a nuke and an anti-nuke
It's a shame however that the UI is so streamlined that we cannot even see in a replay by mousing over a silo - what is inside of it. However this is not a duscussion about the merits of a seasoned player, nor is it one about User Interface design.
The bug; whether or not you choose to accept it, is that multiple anti-nuke defences failed to pick up an incoming nuclear strike despite being capable of doing so. Whether or not a boomerang has some affect on the equation is unknown but it may be a good place to look for a solution to the problem.|||In preparation for the usual AI (Hard) opponent, I had built 2 Anti-Nuke missiles which we're ready to fire in each and every silo, not to be confused with the Nuke missiles of which I had purchased 1 for each silo - and YES, they were all complete and there was no cooldown clock in progress.
For the fanboys and trolls here that might read this, you are more than welcome to confuse me with a moron if it makes you feel happy. I would like to point out that I only joined this forum to post this Boomerang bug (of which two are demonstrated in the videos) so that the GPG Devs can do something about it in their next patch.
Of course, it is the GBG Devs prerogative to ignore and or dismiss any bug (such as the one demonstrated in this video) should they choose to do so - and equally it is my prerogative as a somewhat frustrated customer to not play Supcom2 again (perhaps even uninstall it) until such time as this and several other bugs which have already been posted about here on the forums are correctly addressed (if ever).
As both a gamer and a games developer, I'm not very impressed with the lack of testing that's taken place on the DLC prior to release but I suspect that financial pressure is the real reason for this (as it unfortunately almost always is). Hopefully, the Supcom 2 devs are still being paid by the Producers (Chris?/ Square Enix?) to clean up the DLC code that was clearly rushed for release.
In any case - I've provided enough information here to get something done about this and I don't care for discussing the topic any further. Hopefully something will get done about it soon - if not - well, who cares I guess.