Explore GameReplays...

Supreme Commander

FunkOff vs Ftang, special bomber auroras spam technique

#1FunkOff  Feb 26 2007, 23:44 PM -
Replays: 26 Game:
This is a new strat Iv'e been working on.

I imgaine it can work on maps other than open palms, but open palms was a good starting point.

Insofar, the only thing I can see wrong with this strat is if the push on the base fails, it puts you at a heavy loss in terms of map control, and it is a little bit vulnerable to light bots early on... but that cna be fixed with 1 PD, easy.

Advantages are, however, that it forces the enemy to go AA, either ground to air or interceptors. Interceptors work best, naturally, but require additional factories to build. Mobile AA on the ground is useless against auroras and commanders.

Another advantege to building ony planes early on is very low mass usage... I can upgrade my mex very very early with this strat, using energy from my extra pgens. This helps offset the disadvantage of poor expansion later on when I spam auroras.

Additionally, proper use of bombers before the main attack kills engineers building expansions (notice I focused on defending my engies so I could get some mass, then attacked his expansions) as well as engineers building PDs and AA in the base. The comm himself building these makes things more difficult, but prevents the comm from moving, which can be a huge advantage. since the overall idea of this strat is to take the commander head on with yor own commander + tanks.

Now, you'll notice in this replay my execution of this strat is not very good. I'm working on that. However, even then, sometimes aeon bombers just don't drop their payloads. Also working on minimalizing that. Further, Ftang had the "genius" idea of marching his comm to my forward base, which impeded my auroras spam. His commander barely got away.

It would not have if my commander did not randomly turn and walk sideways... I don't why he did that, but we all know comm AI is a little off... like when the turret gets stuck in place and it fires missing every shot... hopefully GPG and/or good micro can fix this.

I will developed this strategy more in the future, but right now I think it's good enough demonstrating that land factory need not always be first. smile.gif

#2FunkOff  Feb 26 2007, 23:46 PM -
Replays: 26 Game:
Here is another replay of the same strat on the same map. This is against a less skilled opponant, but you can see the general idea more clearly.
#3Cartogan  Feb 27 2007, 00:02 AM -
Replays: 3
Very proggressive numchuks.gif i DL the replay hoped too see a good match was over so soon haha
#4Ftang  Feb 27 2007, 00:07 AM -
Replays: 5 Game:
lol, maybe you should watch your replays before you post them? theres a million things i could have done to guarantee me victory, not least taking out your undefended base by moving my auroras instead of letting them sit for hours, and neglecting comm @ mid, i dont know why you would post this
#5frsrblch  Feb 27 2007, 00:18 AM -
Replays: 2 Game:
One thing that really bothers me about this air build is that you opponent can spot it as soon as you start building that air factory. Most start builds are the same these days, so scores usually mirror each other for a couple minutes. However, the air factory takes longer to build, so your score will lag behind the other player. All it takes is for them to notice the disparity, and wonder why you are lagging behind. At the start of that factory the scores are even, but by the time the land factory is built, the point lead will be almost exactly 50.

Having seen this pattern a couple times in a number of replays so far, I know what I would start building should I see my opponent's score start to slip behind as I start my first factory...
This post has been edited by frsrblch: Feb 27 2007, 00:21 AM
#6FunkOff  Feb 27 2007, 00:39 AM -
Replays: 26 Game:
^^ You are correct.

I was hoping that would not be noticed as to not reveal when I was testing my strat ;p

The thing is, tho, this strat has no direct counter. You can build interceptors, but that doesn't stop bombers from killing engineers on the flanks, and hte engineers assisting the air factory can be told to build land instead.

But yes, how much the score can tell you about the enemy frightens me sometimes. This air build, compared to conventional land build, yields a lower score at the beginning up until a few pgens after the air factory. As soon as the engineers start assisting building bombers, the bomber spam inflates the score to surpass the standard build. GPG should really fix this score thing frusty.gif
This post has been edited by mlsflyer: Feb 27 2007, 00:42 AM
#7frsrblch  Feb 27 2007, 00:53 AM -
Replays: 2 Game:
Well if you ask me, scores are more of an observer/after the game kind of thing.
#8Trumbeller  Feb 27 2007, 00:55 AM -
Replays: 0 Game:
I really like it. I think score helps me determine what sort of player I'm facing. If the score shifts heavily in either direction I can determine that one of us is losing bad or doesn't know how to control an economy.
#9FFAxDeadLegion  Feb 27 2007, 01:29 AM -
Replays: 3 Game:
QUOTE(Trumbeller @ Feb 26 2007, 06:55 PM) *

I really like it. I think score helps me determine what sort of player I'm facing. If the score shifts heavily in either direction I can determine that one of us is losing bad or doesn't know how to control an economy.

But why should score replace good scouting. You can easily identify bad players by actually scouting their base.
#10FunkOff  Feb 27 2007, 01:54 AM -
Replays: 26 Game:
Exactly. The score gives you intel for free that you shouldn't have.
Reply to Comment