<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Making Nuclear War More Interesting In SupCom 2	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/</link>
	<description>We&#039;re back on a default theme because comments broke on my custom one and I don&#039;t have the energy to figure out why</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2013 06:05:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Jason L		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-435505</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jason L]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2013 06:05:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-435505</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[It&#039;s frankly a bit of a stretch, lacking some portion of a dimension and virtually all conventional warfare, but not many games explore this type of RTS ecology. Because it does, I&#039;m quite excited about &lt;a href=&quot;http://turtle-sandbox.com/website/index_stage.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Cannon Brawl&lt;/a&gt;, which crosses a SC*-style resource extraction model with a...SC* style resource distribution model, then pins them into an avatar action shield/artillery RTS.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s frankly a bit of a stretch, lacking some portion of a dimension and virtually all conventional warfare, but not many games explore this type of RTS ecology. Because it does, I&#8217;m quite excited about <a href="http://turtle-sandbox.com/website/index_stage.html" rel="nofollow">Cannon Brawl</a>, which crosses a SC*-style resource extraction model with a&#8230;SC* style resource distribution model, then pins them into an avatar action shield/artillery RTS.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Pentadact		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-220268</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pentadact]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Feb 2011 23:29:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-220268</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Cheers - despammed. It had indeed gone straight in the trash. It&#039;s either the proper HTML link (pasting URLs works), or the word selling in proximity to it. Either way Akismet is dumb, it knows it&#039;s from the same IP as a bunch of approved comments.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cheers &#8211; despammed. It had indeed gone straight in the trash. It&#8217;s either the proper HTML link (pasting URLs works), or the word selling in proximity to it. Either way Akismet is dumb, it knows it&#8217;s from the same IP as a bunch of approved comments.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jason L		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-220266</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jason L]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Feb 2011 23:21:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-220266</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[OK, retyped it and it got obliterated again with only one link. Shoot! It should be within a minute previous to this.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK, retyped it and it got obliterated again with only one link. Shoot! It should be within a minute previous to this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jason L		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-220265</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jason L]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Feb 2011 23:19:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-220265</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[No problem just retyping it, thanks.

I&#039;m sad to hear that Moonbase Commander didn&#039;t click for you, but thanks very much for taking the time to try it. I am ever mindful that in this dawning of the age of ETEWAF, recommending content is increasingly a form of assault; I did not push it on you lightly. Moonbase Commander is one of only two games ever to keep me up until dawn, and I think I&#039;ll remember particulars of one half-hour make-or-break knife-fight until the day I die.

For what it&#039;s worth, though I have fond memories of Challenge mode (really a tutorial campaign) and skirmish/coop, I was spurred to talk about MBC because the post was about wanting systems that would still be fun with an opposing human mind behind them. I was intending it as a candidate for adversarial lunchtimes. Like many others who flock to our new coop overlords,  in adversarial games I quite often feel for one reason or another like I&#039;m wasting my opponent&#039;s time; I have never felt that way in MBC.

While writing the first incarnation of this comment, I checked some fact that got cut and accidentally discovered that MBC is officially un-abandonwared! Infogrames/Atari is &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.atari.com/games/moonbase_command/pc-download&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;selling it&lt;/a&gt; digitally for USD10 (provided you remember to turn off their default &#039;download insurance&#039; charge). In addition to my ! reaction, I stated my intent to buy it again on principle. Having done so and getting a second shot at this blather, I can report that it has the most hilariously protracted, makeshift installation process I&#039;ve seen in years - nearly decades. Here&#039;s what happens when you buy Moonbase Commander from Atari:
1. You get a link from the payment receipt page. 
2. Download and run the small Atari downloader application.
3. Downloader downloads the game data in a literal .rar file or two.
4. Extractor dialog asks you where to extract temporary installation files from the .rars. Why?
5. Because they literally just packed up all the files from the original CD, including autorun.exe from which you could call the installer or play the game in situ without installing if you wished.
6. I think the extractor does automatically launch setup.exe, which asks you for a location to actually install and proceeds as standard for an installer wizard.

In closing, if any future reader is actually convinced to try this based on my ranting, one tip in addition to Zauron&#039;s guide and utilities is important. Tucked away in the README (&#039;Back in my day...&#039;) is the way - the only way - to change between windowed and fullscreen modes: Shift-F5. I mean, &lt;i&gt;obviously&lt;/i&gt;, but still. Figured I should tack that on.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No problem just retyping it, thanks.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m sad to hear that Moonbase Commander didn&#8217;t click for you, but thanks very much for taking the time to try it. I am ever mindful that in this dawning of the age of ETEWAF, recommending content is increasingly a form of assault; I did not push it on you lightly. Moonbase Commander is one of only two games ever to keep me up until dawn, and I think I&#8217;ll remember particulars of one half-hour make-or-break knife-fight until the day I die.</p>
<p>For what it&#8217;s worth, though I have fond memories of Challenge mode (really a tutorial campaign) and skirmish/coop, I was spurred to talk about MBC because the post was about wanting systems that would still be fun with an opposing human mind behind them. I was intending it as a candidate for adversarial lunchtimes. Like many others who flock to our new coop overlords,  in adversarial games I quite often feel for one reason or another like I&#8217;m wasting my opponent&#8217;s time; I have never felt that way in MBC.</p>
<p>While writing the first incarnation of this comment, I checked some fact that got cut and accidentally discovered that MBC is officially un-abandonwared! Infogrames/Atari is <a href="http://www.atari.com/games/moonbase_command/pc-download" rel="nofollow">selling it</a> digitally for USD10 (provided you remember to turn off their default &#8216;download insurance&#8217; charge). In addition to my ! reaction, I stated my intent to buy it again on principle. Having done so and getting a second shot at this blather, I can report that it has the most hilariously protracted, makeshift installation process I&#8217;ve seen in years &#8211; nearly decades. Here&#8217;s what happens when you buy Moonbase Commander from Atari:<br />
1. You get a link from the payment receipt page.<br />
2. Download and run the small Atari downloader application.<br />
3. Downloader downloads the game data in a literal .rar file or two.<br />
4. Extractor dialog asks you where to extract temporary installation files from the .rars. Why?<br />
5. Because they literally just packed up all the files from the original CD, including autorun.exe from which you could call the installer or play the game in situ without installing if you wished.<br />
6. I think the extractor does automatically launch setup.exe, which asks you for a location to actually install and proceeds as standard for an installer wizard.</p>
<p>In closing, if any future reader is actually convinced to try this based on my ranting, one tip in addition to Zauron&#8217;s guide and utilities is important. Tucked away in the README (&#8216;Back in my day&#8230;&#8217;) is the way &#8211; the only way &#8211; to change between windowed and fullscreen modes: Shift-F5. I mean, <i>obviously</i>, but still. Figured I should tack that on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Pentadact		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-220163</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pentadact]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Feb 2011 12:01:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-220163</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Doh. Sooner the better with any missing comments - I&#039;ve had 1,068 &#039;spams&#039; since then and the search function doesn&#039;t work. There&#039;s nothing pending moderation, I&#039;m afraid, so Akismet has evidently condemned you as certain spam. Spam Karma was much better at this stuff back when it was still being maintained. Apart from anything, Akismet doesn&#039;t think it&#039;s a false positive if you tell it something in your spam folder isn&#039;t spam, so proudly boasts a 0% false positive track record. Yes, Akismet, discounting your fatal errors you are perfect.

Might be able to dig it out if you know the date and time? Was it the same as the &#039;last in this wave&#039; comment?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Doh. Sooner the better with any missing comments &#8211; I&#8217;ve had 1,068 &#8216;spams&#8217; since then and the search function doesn&#8217;t work. There&#8217;s nothing pending moderation, I&#8217;m afraid, so Akismet has evidently condemned you as certain spam. Spam Karma was much better at this stuff back when it was still being maintained. Apart from anything, Akismet doesn&#8217;t think it&#8217;s a false positive if you tell it something in your spam folder isn&#8217;t spam, so proudly boasts a 0% false positive track record. Yes, Akismet, discounting your fatal errors you are perfect.</p>
<p>Might be able to dig it out if you know the date and time? Was it the same as the &#8216;last in this wave&#8217; comment?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jason L		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-220146</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jason L]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Feb 2011 02:04:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-220146</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I have a comment on this post hung up in moderation, the largest component of that &#039;wave of logorrhea&#039;. (Excessive links filter, I&#039;m sure). I figured you were busy and would get around to it on a periodic spam sweep, but it&#039;s been over a week and I&#039;ve tipped to thinking it would be less incourteous to let you know.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have a comment on this post hung up in moderation, the largest component of that &#8216;wave of logorrhea&#8217;. (Excessive links filter, I&#8217;m sure). I figured you were busy and would get around to it on a periodic spam sweep, but it&#8217;s been over a week and I&#8217;ve tipped to thinking it would be less incourteous to let you know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jason L		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-219895</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jason L]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Feb 2011 05:12:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-219895</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The last in this wave of logorrhea - while I&#039;m talking about Podcast 50, I was a little surprised nobody brought up Brink as a potential highlight of 2011, and you in particular. I&#039;m well aware that I&#039;m biased - I&#039;m simply buzzing with anticipation, more excited than I&#039;ve been about a shooter since Half-Life 2  - but having read James 1.0, Brink is a small-teams objective deathmatcher emphasising strategic positioning and action-movie environmental mobility, in which there is a silent running perk whose icon is a pair of slippers; sound familiar?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The last in this wave of logorrhea &#8211; while I&#8217;m talking about Podcast 50, I was a little surprised nobody brought up Brink as a potential highlight of 2011, and you in particular. I&#8217;m well aware that I&#8217;m biased &#8211; I&#8217;m simply buzzing with anticipation, more excited than I&#8217;ve been about a shooter since Half-Life 2  &#8211; but having read James 1.0, Brink is a small-teams objective deathmatcher emphasising strategic positioning and action-movie environmental mobility, in which there is a silent running perk whose icon is a pair of slippers; sound familiar?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Pentadact		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-219886</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pentadact]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Feb 2011 00:36:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-219886</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Aha. I did play it in the end, on my netbook on a plane journey. I didn&#039;t bring a guide with me, though, and had a hard time learning what all the weapons did.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Aha. I did play it in the end, on my netbook on a plane journey. I didn&#8217;t bring a guide with me, though, and had a hard time learning what all the weapons did.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jason L		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-219882</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jason L]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2011 23:02:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-219882</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[No, not really, sorry. Me, up-page. Moon&#039;B&#039;ase Commander.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, not really, sorry. Me, up-page. Moon&#8217;B&#8217;ase Commander.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Pentadact		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-219874</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pentadact]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2011 19:42:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-219874</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[It&#039;s probably something obvious but I&#039;m drawing a blank - MBC?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s probably something obvious but I&#8217;m drawing a blank &#8211; MBC?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Anonymous		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-219863</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anonymous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2011 16:11:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-219863</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Just listened to PCGPC 50. Power generators are also explodey barrels in MBC, wink wink.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just listened to PCGPC 50. Power generators are also explodey barrels in MBC, wink wink.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jason L		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-153272</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jason L]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Mar 2010 12:34:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-153272</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Sounds good to me - allow scouting, but remove the UI load on buttons, tech trees and build queues. Could be very nice.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sounds good to me &#8211; allow scouting, but remove the UI load on buttons, tech trees and build queues. Could be very nice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Cpt.Average		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-153270</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cpt.Average]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Mar 2010 09:28:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-153270</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Just a thought on Fog of War.  Would it be an interesting idea to let players have 3-4 permanent vision spots, ala the american spy drones from C&#038;C Generals?  Ones you could tech up to reposition / attach to mobile forces / combine into a larger static area.  With all players able to see outside their own base from the outset, rush tactics become less feasible but not impossible - and if anything it would allow greater interaction at the start of the game.
  I&#039;ll admit this is a compromise, but it
a) is easily implemented
b) allows for a decent amount of deception &#038; second-guessing
c) still rewards skilled players without hosing the casual crowd.

Good idea yes/no?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just a thought on Fog of War.  Would it be an interesting idea to let players have 3-4 permanent vision spots, ala the american spy drones from C&amp;C Generals?  Ones you could tech up to reposition / attach to mobile forces / combine into a larger static area.  With all players able to see outside their own base from the outset, rush tactics become less feasible but not impossible &#8211; and if anything it would allow greater interaction at the start of the game.<br />
  I&#8217;ll admit this is a compromise, but it<br />
a) is easily implemented<br />
b) allows for a decent amount of deception &amp; second-guessing<br />
c) still rewards skilled players without hosing the casual crowd.</p>
<p>Good idea yes/no?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Mr Bubbles		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-149669</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mr Bubbles]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 23:39:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-149669</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I haven&#039;t played SupCom2 but maybe with the fog of war issue it could work like the omni (?) sensors and normal radar - your radar has a massive radar distance, but in a smaller, but still large, radius it can see all units in nice shiny detail.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I haven&#8217;t played SupCom2 but maybe with the fog of war issue it could work like the omni (?) sensors and normal radar &#8211; your radar has a massive radar distance, but in a smaller, but still large, radius it can see all units in nice shiny detail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: 1stGear		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-149650</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[1stGear]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 01:29:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-149650</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[RUSE has a decent solution for the fog of war issue.  You can see the general type of all of your enemies&#039; units and will learn the location of their bases at a pretty respectable distance.  The game then genuinely becomes about outmanuvering your opponents, as well as subverting their intelligence.

That said, that&#039;s intentionally a significant part of RUSE, hence the name, and might not work as well in SupCom2]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>RUSE has a decent solution for the fog of war issue.  You can see the general type of all of your enemies&#8217; units and will learn the location of their bases at a pretty respectable distance.  The game then genuinely becomes about outmanuvering your opponents, as well as subverting their intelligence.</p>
<p>That said, that&#8217;s intentionally a significant part of RUSE, hence the name, and might not work as well in SupCom2</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Skusey		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-149604</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Skusey]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 20:01:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-149604</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[That&#039;s kind of you Ludo, I&#039;m looking forward to it.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s kind of you Ludo, I&#8217;m looking forward to it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jason L		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-149495</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jason L]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 14:46:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-149495</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I assume you&#039;ve played Moonbase Commander, Tom, since about two-thirds of these mechanics are in it. (If you haven&#039;t, Tom or anyone, you really, all-caps REALLY should; these shoot-shield-walk mechanics are sufficient on their own to create a perfect game. Yes, I said it and I meant it.)

Convenient &lt;a HREF=&quot;http://zauron.net/utilities.php&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;launcher&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a HREF=&quot;http://www.gamefaqs.com/computer/doswin/file/555470/17448&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;guide&lt;/a&gt; from main community guy. Not posting shady abandonware stuff on James by default, use your favourite venue.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I assume you&#8217;ve played Moonbase Commander, Tom, since about two-thirds of these mechanics are in it. (If you haven&#8217;t, Tom or anyone, you really, all-caps REALLY should; these shoot-shield-walk mechanics are sufficient on their own to create a perfect game. Yes, I said it and I meant it.)</p>
<p>Convenient <a HREF="http://zauron.net/utilities.php" rel="nofollow">launcher</a> and <a HREF="http://www.gamefaqs.com/computer/doswin/file/555470/17448" rel="nofollow">guide</a> from main community guy. Not posting shady abandonware stuff on James by default, use your favourite venue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Ludo		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-149484</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ludo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 14:19:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-149484</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hi Skusey, me and Flowepot Wang and a few others are skirmishing pretty regularly. Here&#039;s my steam ID if you fancy joining us http://steamcommunity.com/id/caradrel]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Skusey, me and Flowepot Wang and a few others are skirmishing pretty regularly. Here&#8217;s my steam ID if you fancy joining us <a href="http://steamcommunity.com/id/caradrel" rel="nofollow ugc">http://steamcommunity.com/id/caradrel</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Skusey		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-149480</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Skusey]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 14:13:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-149480</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Nuclear war is a bit boring this time, I haven&#039;t found anybody to play against yet but from what I&#039;ve played against the AI, I&#039;d rather that nuclear missiles were so expensive and devastating that if anybody could actually afford them without being eradicated they&#039;d be able to win easily by fighting with robots. I&#039;d quite like them to be akin to the taunt kills in TF2, hard to do but delightfully embarrassing for the victim.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nuclear war is a bit boring this time, I haven&#8217;t found anybody to play against yet but from what I&#8217;ve played against the AI, I&#8217;d rather that nuclear missiles were so expensive and devastating that if anybody could actually afford them without being eradicated they&#8217;d be able to win easily by fighting with robots. I&#8217;d quite like them to be akin to the taunt kills in TF2, hard to do but delightfully embarrassing for the victim.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Ludo		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-149466</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ludo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 13:28:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-149466</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Fog of war is used well in hardcore sims like Combat Mission and Theatre of War where different units have different scouting abilities and casing the battlefield is a game in itself. In the context of games set in modern or future times it&#039;s clearly ridiculous and indeed irritating. I really like the proposed alternatives, in fact they remind me a lot of Ruse with decoy factories for the UEF and Cybran Adapters acting as camo nets.

I&#039;ve found that the reduction in the battlefield size has had a significant impact on the level of strategy in the game. You lose some of the awesome sense of scale, but the maps are also too small to give you room outmaneuver your opponent. I find myself playing 2-4 player scraps on Seton&#039;s Clutch to get some breathing space.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fog of war is used well in hardcore sims like Combat Mission and Theatre of War where different units have different scouting abilities and casing the battlefield is a game in itself. In the context of games set in modern or future times it&#8217;s clearly ridiculous and indeed irritating. I really like the proposed alternatives, in fact they remind me a lot of Ruse with decoy factories for the UEF and Cybran Adapters acting as camo nets.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve found that the reduction in the battlefield size has had a significant impact on the level of strategy in the game. You lose some of the awesome sense of scale, but the maps are also too small to give you room outmaneuver your opponent. I find myself playing 2-4 player scraps on Seton&#8217;s Clutch to get some breathing space.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Flowerpot Wang		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-149457</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Flowerpot Wang]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:59:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-149457</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Skirmishing with friends against AI seems to be the most fun I&#039;ve had with this game so far (not even touched the campaign - the demo put me off), and your reasons make sense for why this would be a fun game to be doing this. (defending a base against Cheating AIs until you can build nukes, for instance, since the AI seem to be terrible at building anti-nukes). However, I can&#039;t help but feel that these tactics will not work against real human players, which makes me feel like I&#039;m taking advantage of an AI flaw instead of being actually tactical. Not played any proper games against human opponents as of yet, but I can imagine the annoyances such as nukes/anti nukes and the fog of war really becoming an annoyance here.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Skirmishing with friends against AI seems to be the most fun I&#8217;ve had with this game so far (not even touched the campaign &#8211; the demo put me off), and your reasons make sense for why this would be a fun game to be doing this. (defending a base against Cheating AIs until you can build nukes, for instance, since the AI seem to be terrible at building anti-nukes). However, I can&#8217;t help but feel that these tactics will not work against real human players, which makes me feel like I&#8217;m taking advantage of an AI flaw instead of being actually tactical. Not played any proper games against human opponents as of yet, but I can imagine the annoyances such as nukes/anti nukes and the fog of war really becoming an annoyance here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Nick		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-149439</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nick]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:22:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-149439</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Here, here!  The preview trailers were all about how upgrades would change the look of your troops, when the final thing came it was limited to a couple of troops in fairly generic ways.  What about either/or upgrades?  You can give your tanks an extra gun or an anti-air missile, the adaptors can have a stealth field or a direct fire weapon.

Haven&#039;t played online, but currently the nuke thing does sounds a bit rubbish.  I really like the Cybran walking nuke thing, it&#039;s a real two-finger salute.

Mostly I&#039;ve played the campaign mostly it&#039;s traditional boring tutorial stuff, but there&#039;re some nice ones in there.  The stand-out for me is the second Cybran one, it&#039;s a really unique encounter.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here, here!  The preview trailers were all about how upgrades would change the look of your troops, when the final thing came it was limited to a couple of troops in fairly generic ways.  What about either/or upgrades?  You can give your tanks an extra gun or an anti-air missile, the adaptors can have a stealth field or a direct fire weapon.</p>
<p>Haven&#8217;t played online, but currently the nuke thing does sounds a bit rubbish.  I really like the Cybran walking nuke thing, it&#8217;s a real two-finger salute.</p>
<p>Mostly I&#8217;ve played the campaign mostly it&#8217;s traditional boring tutorial stuff, but there&#8217;re some nice ones in there.  The stand-out for me is the second Cybran one, it&#8217;s a really unique encounter.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jaz		</title>
		<link>https://www.pentadact.com/2010-03-15-making-nuclear-war-more-interesting-in-supcom-2/#comment-149089</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jaz]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 01:54:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pentadact.com/?p=1661#comment-149089</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Very interested in this, specifically. I&#039;m always doing this sort of thing to games, but you&#039;re much more familiar with strategy than I am, so it&#039;s cool to see what really makes SupCom2 fun for you.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very interested in this, specifically. I&#8217;m always doing this sort of thing to games, but you&#8217;re much more familiar with strategy than I am, so it&#8217;s cool to see what really makes SupCom2 fun for you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
