Is SupCom 2 literally SupCom FA on a diet?

[:1]While I am a huge fan of SupCom FA, it wasn't until the holidays that I picked up SupCom 2 + DLC for $6 from a Steam special. I looked at the demo when the game was released last year and, in all honesty, was not that impressed. I definitely wasn't going to pay full price for it.
Having gotten a chance to thoroughly explore SupCom 2 these last couple of weeks, I'm coming to the conclusion that the changes that differentiate it with SupCom FA were largely to address (note I did not use the word "correct") slowdown problems with SupCom FA and its steep system requirements rather than attract a new generation of customers given the simplified gameplay.
My reasons for this conclusion are the following:

1. The game is specifically advertised to run on lower specs than SupCom FA;
   
2. In SupCom 2 you have to wait until you have enough mass + energy to build something instead of queuing it up and taking a hit on your income rate (which would allow you to simultaneously build so many things) as in SupCom FA. Now, in SupCom 2 when you queue something to be built and you don't have enough resources, your unit just idles until there is enough to build. This reduces the number of ongoing things processed by the cpu, thereby increasing performance;
   
3. The whole tech tree thing. It appears that it's not really meant to simplify micro-management or add some "cool" new unique gameplay feature, but rather to again limit how many things are simultaneously being built and concurrently utilizing the economy. In the original SupCom you teched up your bases in the same manner as building units.
   The kind of upgrades in SupCom 2 (health, damage, vision, etc.), even if they do not have counterparts in SupCom FA could have easily been implemented in SupCom 2 using the old economy-based build/research approach. But to do so, would tax the cpu.
   Most of the upgrade paths in SupCom 2 simply don't make any sense. Given that many upgrades in SupCom 2 are useless for the seasoned SupCom FA player, removing them would leave a very, very slim tech tree.
   Simply clicking on an upgrade option rather than building through the economy reduces the number of ongoing things processed by the cpu, thereby increasing performance;
   
4. Drastic reduction in the number of different playable units; and
   
5. Storyline aside, eliminating one playable race eliminates the number of different units the engine has to deal with and therefore provides more wiggle remove for the previous points

I haven't been able to confirm this for myself, but perusing the forums, there is a suggestion that the massive slow downs in SupCom FA are mostly attributable to the AI scripts. The theory is that the AI scripts continue to send commands to dead units. Obviously, after a while, this taxes the cpu. If this is indeed the problem, then some modding of the AI scripts should be able address this problem.
Therefore, instead of "improving" the SupCom FA engine to create SupCom 2, I'm inclined to believe that SupCom 2 is nothing more than a stripped-down SupCom FA engine. In other words, SupCom FA uses a superior engine to what is used by SupCom 2.|||You are about 9 months late to the SupCom2-bashing party. Please try to be on time in the future.|||X-Cubed|||What's that supposed to mean?|||Hi-Five. I was paying a complement to your epic quip.|||Honestly I doubt everything you stated was done in the name of preformance, obviously one of thier goals when developping the game was to have it run better or a larger varierty on computers, at least comapred to FA. But I wouldn't go as far to say the entire engineis inferior for FA's, after all, it is just an updated version of the Original Moho Engine used in SupCom1, which got updated for FA, then for Demigod, and THEN for SupCom2.
Its not that Supcom2's engine is inferior, more so you could think of it as not being used to it's fullest potential. The Flow field pathfinding is inarguably a step in the right direction, wether the system worked well, is a subject that has many opposing views.
To be honest I'd love to be able to properlly mod Supcom 2, there are many things in SupCom2 that just work as they were built to, like mobile factories actually being mobile, as in building and moving at the same time.
I described Supcom2 very well once, you can think of it as a car, its got a sweet engine, exhaust and such, and decent body, but god dammit, some idiot accidentally painted it Hot Pink instead of whatever color you think is most epic.
Mike|||X-Cubed|||BulletMagnet|||OrangeKnight|||It's not so much the engine is inferior when it comes to modding. There's only one thing stopping mod support from being made by the community (left out when much of the lobby Lua code was migrated into the engine).
In every other regard, it looks like the new engine trumps the old one.|||madface|||OrangeKnight|||I wouldn't say inferior engine at all - that justification is wrong. The engine is held back, nothing more.
madface|||madface|||Quote:|||Quote:|||madface|||CoH Online (not my cup of tea), DoW II (best RTT around, period, only Live is hurting it) and SupCom 2 (decently improved stuff but still flawed) are the RTSs which can escape some of SCII's reign (undeserved reign if you only look at gameplay).
There isn't much else to be excited about except for Retribution, possible SupCom 2 DLC and Kings and Castles. SupCom: FA easily holds its own amidst the current top RTSs though. It's way better than some critics have said. The best SupCom experience lies somewhere between FA and SupCom 2, I think that's the bottom line and hopefully also the design lesson that CT will learn for SupCom 3.|||madface|||Quote:|||The problem is, FA has those performance issues that the Sup2 fanboys lord over those who like FA.
Is it too much to ask for the best of both worlds, even if the community has to make it themselves?|||Madface, you are spending too much time making Supcom2 into FA2, just play the game, learn the mechanics, really get to grips with the game and then start passing judgement based on what Supcom2 IS.
To begin with start playing a more aggressive game and you'll realise because you only have to go into the research tree and upgrade, maintaining an early offensive is far more feasible while still looking at the mid or even late game.
The real fun of Supcom2 is picking a research and basing your strategy off it, be it Long range artillery, Megaliths or Space temple, start playing Supcom2 as it was intended to be played and you may find it's a far better game than you give it credit for.
If it still isn't your cup of tea then so be it, I'm sorry you feel you wasted $6. I myself feel my preorder of the game, about £25 + DLC, was all money well spent.|||Dude, you spent six bucks. Either play the game and enjoy it, or cry like a baby and not have any fun. Either way, you are doing no good in trying to shove your opinion down everyone's throats.|||Some advice
1) OP, if you are going to complain about wasting six f'ing dollars, then you are not in a position to be spending six dollars. Get a job.
2) To anyone telling the OP to take it somewhere else: Why? Last I checked, this is the Sup2 forum. The OP's post wasn't rude or insulting, in fact, maybe GPG likes to read these kind of things, ever think about that? Stop reading/commenting in threads you don't like.
Anyways, I loved FA. It was literally the perfect strategy game for me. I had to stop playing it because the performance issues and Sim Speed Slowdown just became too much to bare. It's such a tragedy really. Sup2 isn't my cup of tea, I keep trying to get into it... but it's just missing something. Another tragedy. Now I have my sights set on Kings and Castles... Third time's a charm? I hope so...|||BulletMagnet