It really proves that if something isn't broken, don't try and fix it. I know what you were going for with 2.2, but it failed, rather epically. There's a reason I put semi-serious after that comment... I skimmed the thread. I just put all of the things I think should change in one place. /lazy Commander rushing was an art, and used to be an important part of Empires. More generally, since everything was so much more powerful in 2.12, commanders needed to be more skilled to win.
I have no clue what you're talking about, I'm going to assume that talking in general like that is just another way of trolling.
Commander rushing was a stupid tactic and often would get the commander killed and end the game with in the first minute. I am glad its gone and plus CV's aren't griefed with in the first minute too.
at least it ended within in 5 minutes and didnt drag on for half an hour plus ... but i rather commrushing (aswell as boomtanking) being nerfed with considerably slower command vehicles (especially since you can use scout speed) than with strange overheating behavior at the start, i never liked that. rather make the comm really slow, it got a good health buff (compaired to 2.12) anyway, maybe even buff the armor a bit more. i think the comm should be supportive to his troups, not the knight in shiny armor that powerslides into the enemy lines ...
in my eyes implementing boom-tanking as a good strategy would only work if the comm was a spawn (to bail him out if stuff goes wrong) but enabling that would mess up things like ninja etc
This is a very circular definition of smart commanders, and one which places a very large emphasis on driving rather than commanding skill.
FFUU. Still want me to knock up some? I got them like 90% done. I know you did some but I mean, if you wanna compare or whatever. Sign into steam.
Commanders used to be able to do more at the beginning, and what they did was important. Boom tanking wasn't as common because CVs didn't used to be so heavily armored.
What they did was decide the game, if your commander failed to secure the area then you lost. Having the match be effectively won or lost by a duel between two people, especially when the skillset required to win is not a core part of their role was a bad idea and always will be.
It most certainly was not the end of the game. You'd turn around and head to the enemy main while all their guys are in another area. APC rushing was also 10 times as deadly as it is now, so it all balanced out nicely.
Tbh, I'm glad of the CV overheat, except on slaughtered. Too many times you lost your CV during the starting rush, and the game was over, simple as. Sure, your team can take the enemy main, but that's not much good when they have your comm somewhere else.
Except it didn't. At the start of the match the two commanders would head out to the contested area on the map, sometimes pushing a few infantry infront of them. Then once they had reached that point it was a race to get up the first barracks in that area and push the enemy out. The winner would secure the area, the loser would retreat to his main base or get stuck/stunned and die. Unless you went for an APC rush right off the bat (something which was rare) getting a vehicle factory would usually come after the contested area has been secured lost, at which point they would have a VF of their own up. Then again, I do not remember the standards of command being too high, with sub-optimal research paths chosen regularly and very few commander targets.
I used to plan entire games on APC rushing, and I'd win, 9 times out of 10. Losing an area at the start of the map was a disadvantage, but people could and did turn it around. IMO they were higher in 2.12.
