UEF TEC , Advent Aeon - arrghh!!

lol, well, the good news is that they arent going to be very alike, apparently sins will actually have strategy...

Supcom has strategy. In fact, Supcom has more strategy then StarCraft (or any other generic strategy game like Maelstrom or WarFront). As for the Aeon = Advent, they are totally different. They just look alike

I misphrased, sorry:

supcom= if you mess up even a little early you die
all races are clones w/ a few stat changes
great graphics that you never really get to see

I'll agree with you there

I'll agree with both of you... And the fact that Multianna is really good at the game just proves there is something wrong with it!

Then let me say:

the fact that lordkosc is really good at CoH just proves there is something wrong with it!

First one I'll agree with, second one is debatable, but the middle one is ridiculous. Sure, the units all fill the same basic roles, but those "few stat changes" create totally different units / approaches. Take my favorite example of the Aoeon's extra accurate artillery, Vs. the Cybran's can't-hit-the-broad-side-of-a-barn-door but AoE arty. I hate the Cybran approach, which can deal with swarms but can't pound incoming heavy units very effectively.

Its really cool actually, apparently you can have up to three maps that are each completely zoomable.

Talk about making a game a task though...

In the artilery aspect, at least in my opinion, the game is unbalanced and wehn I talk about artilery I mean the tear four experimentals. Oh, and the battleships are also hugely unbalanced, UEF rules the seas while Aeon and Cybran take a lower stand. Not to mention the fact that they are right, besides a few changes here or there each race plays the same way, techs the same way, has basically the same units with a few different abilities.

I agree that most the factions units are clones of each other with different weapon effects, but pretty much similar stats. The exceptions being experimentals, and some t2/t3 stuff.

Ironically it is the Aeon that is "supposed" to rule the sea, but i agree that TEC...errr i mean UEF has better naval power. At least they can hit a moving target sometimes. Where an Aeon battleship (and T2 destroyer) needs its target to be damn near at a stand still for it to hit.

As far as arty is concerned, and i am talking about ALL of the arty in the game. The Cybrans got the shaft big time. Their arty couldnt hit the broadside of a barn from a foot away. They got the shaft in shields as well. As even with triple fully upgraded shields they fall to UEF t3 arty in a couple hits. Where as a similar assault on UEF, or Aeon shields those shields would still be up after a few hits of t3 arty. Stealth tech is all but useless if the enemy has, and uses good recon. The cybran navy is just as useless as its arty. The walking destroyer is a joke. This makes the Cybrans the epitome of cannon fodder IMO. The one, and only offensive advantage they had was the Mantis during the beta before it got nerfed. After that statistically damn near all cybran units are weaker than their UEF, or Aeon counterparts. With the exception of tac missiles. Surprisingly the Cybran tac missile launchers, and base defenses are the best in the game. Like Emporer said they can mow down base invaders, but they just have no offensive punch unless mustered in huge numbers (ala zerg rush).

I play as Cybran vs AI opponents because of this disadvantage. Makes the game a little more challenging.