Supreme Commander or Command & Conquer 3? - bit-tech.net Forums

Aman · 13th Apr 2007, 07:31

I personally like the game play of C&C3 and the gun effects are stunning.

Cabe64 · 14th Apr 2007, 20:54

I've played both and in my opinion C&C3 is the one to go for. Its fantastic.

capnPedro · 14th Apr 2007, 21:45

I've been playing the demos today. I like the sound of Supreme Commander, but in the end I just can't get into it.

C&C3 is for me; I liked the previous games (especially Red Alert) and the demo is amazing. My only niggle is you can't zoom out far enough. I wasn't expecting an overview like in SupCom, but just a tad more would have been nice.

dragontail · 14th Apr 2007, 22:49

Whilst SupCom is a nice change from the norm, I prefer cnc3, just for the good old FMV and traditional cnc gameplay. Plus the fact that SumCom encourages turtling and building huge uber units that make anything you build early game useless just doesn't click for me :S

specofdust · 14th Apr 2007, 22:51

Havning played CnC3 and not played SupCom, I'll say SupCom. CnC3 isn't a proper stratagy game...there's not really anything complicated to it. It's somewhere akin to playing solitare or minesweeper imo. Very braindead stuff, if rather fun at times.

automagsrock · 14th Apr 2007, 22:51

Get them both

Seriously though, I bought C & C 3 because I've been a fan since numero uno. I was not disapointed in my purchase either.

But,

I bought Sup. Com. because I am a thinker. I like to plan out everything I do at a slower pace to be more thorough so that I can completely anhiliate my opponent. Sup. Com. lets me do just that. I can take my time, get a nice defense setup and get my army going, where as with C & C 3 it's one or the other. I love the multi player in C & C 3 because it's what you want: fast, intense and in your face. Sup. Com's multiplayer is more like chess in a sense.

That's my opinion's on both games. I hope to see some of you online in both!! (just be looking for heavy q :P )

mookboy · 14th Apr 2007, 23:35

I've got Supreme Commander, and aside from loving it, I would say try the demo first as it's not quite what you may expect from a RTS game. Certainly as mentioned above it requires a fair bit more planning and consideration than many other games along similar lines. The simple fact of it working on a totally different scale to other games took me a while to get to grips with. All your old RTS strategies are worthless as it works beyond the old idea of simply being the first person/player to rush the other base with superior numbers. You really do need to use several different strands of attack in harmony or fail horribly. Rush a base with a squadron of tanks, but ensure they have support from anti-aircraft gunners or bombers will obliterate them. Forget to add some fast moving robotic grunt units and you'll find your tanks swamped by fast attack units. And so on.

I would say if you are after fast and furious, low-brow but fun gameplay go for CnC. If you want something with depth and really time consuming strategy, get Supreme Commander.

Neogumbercules · 14th Apr 2007, 23:42

Supreme Command is really fun and pretty cool, but gets boring really quickly.

CnC3 is really fun and pretty cool, and doesn't get boring as fast.

OtakuHawk · 15th Apr 2007, 18:52

just to let you know, you're comparing Chess to Checkers here.

One is a long game that places importance on strategic planning,

the other places importance on micromanagement and speed.

I'm not dissin either game, as I like both, but don't think you can say either is superior to the other, because they are apples and oranges.

Mosey · 15th Apr 2007, 20:04

I havent really played that much supcom but i'm with C&C3. It's pretty sweet!

dragontail · 16th Apr 2007, 20:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by OtakuHawk

just to let you know, you're comparing Chess to Checkers here.

One is a long game that places importance on strategic planning,

the other places importance on micromanagement and speed.

I'm not dissin either game, as I like both, but don't think you can say either is superior to the other, because they are apples and oranges.

QFT imho.

Veles · 16th Apr 2007, 20:21

I prefer C&C3 myself, SupCom takes far too long IMO. I find it pretty difficult to get into. Undoubtedly SupCom requires more strategy, but for me C&C3 is a lot more fun.

BioSniper · 16th Apr 2007, 20:46

I'm a sup com man, I find games like C&C3 breed rushers which I detest :P

Neogumbercules · 17th Apr 2007, 02:58

Rushing is a pretty popular strategy in CnC3. I have a lot of fun in 3v3 games because then tend to last a pretty long time and usually end with a clash of epic proportions.

Kinda like supcom but it doesn't take 2 hours to get there. I like supcom, but its just so damn slow.

OtakuHawk · 17th Apr 2007, 20:44

and for those of you who think supcom is slow, play smaller maps, like open palms.

Veles · 18th Apr 2007, 00:04

It's more the fact it takes ages to build up the tech tree really

automagsrock · 18th Apr 2007, 05:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Veles

It's more the fact it takes ages to build up the tech tree really

No it doesn't/ I can be tech 3 building tech 4 in 10 minutes (its all about the engineers baby!)

Giggz · 18th Apr 2007, 15:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cabe64

I've played both and in my opinion C&C3 is the one to go for. Its fantastic.

tacticus · 21st Apr 2007, 10:53

You do not just walk into Mordor

unless you are a Galactic Colossus

Sup Com for the Scale
Sup Com because isn’t it fun seeing someone try and kill you with t1 bombers
Sup Com because nothing says loving like your Sup Com packing a tactical nuke or 2 >

Sup Com because stealth battleships and artillery destroy stuff
Sup Com because artillery can fire a resonable distance

scq · 21st Apr 2007, 22:35

I was never into RTS until I started playing Company of Heroes, which I loved. My friend suggested I try C&C3, (I had played a little Red Alert 2 before, and didn't like it much).

I played the demo of C&C 3, and while I can see where the novelty is for C&C fans, I didn't like it. The whole game is just build up units, send over a mob. I guess that's just the nature of the macro game. It's not really strategy as much as resource management. You either race to build up mammoth tanks, or some kind of one-shot-and-win superweapon.

I haven't played Supreme Commander, but I've heard it's super complicated. Personally, I'm sticking with CoH for now. A great balance of micro and resource management.

13th Apr 2007, 07:31	#1
Aman Multimodder Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 189	Supreme Commander or Command & Conquer 3? I personally like the game play of C&C3 and the gun effects are stunning.

14th Apr 2007, 22:49	#4
dragontail 7-2 offsuit Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Belfast/Cambridge Posts: 1,389	Whilst SupCom is a nice change from the norm, I prefer cnc3, just for the good old FMV and traditional cnc gameplay. Plus the fact that SumCom encourages turtling and building huge uber units that make anything you build early game useless just doesn't click for me :S __________________ Project COMTAR Acoustic Guitar, meet Mini-ITX *[ * * * * * * * * ]* MBP 15" \| Dell 2408WFP

14th Apr 2007, 22:51	#5
specofdust Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Aberdeen, UK, EU Posts: 7,609	Havning played CnC3 and not played SupCom, I'll say SupCom. CnC3 isn't a proper stratagy game...there's not really anything complicated to it. It's somewhere akin to playing solitare or minesweeper imo. Very braindead stuff, if rather fun at times. __________________ Like marmite, only no-one hates it Mmm bop!

14th Apr 2007, 22:51	#6
automagsrock Hypermodder Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Great Falls, Montana, US Posts: 936	Get them both Seriously though, I bought C & C 3 because I've been a fan since numero uno. I was not disapointed in my purchase either. But, I bought Sup. Com. because I am a thinker. I like to plan out everything I do at a slower pace to be more thorough so that I can completely anhiliate my opponent. Sup. Com. lets me do just that. I can take my time, get a nice defense setup and get my army going, where as with C & C 3 it's one or the other. I love the multi player in C & C 3 because it's what you want: fast, intense and in your face. Sup. Com's multiplayer is more like chess in a sense. That's my opinion's on both games. I hope to see some of you online in both!! (just be looking for heavy q :P ) __________________ I am bored of my old sig, so here's my WoW character armory link instead PS3 network name: Myrmccheese

14th Apr 2007, 23:35	#7
mookboy ABSOLUTELY GUTTED.. COME BACK KEANO Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: NEwcastle Posts: 3,746	I've got Supreme Commander, and aside from loving it, I would say try the demo first as it's not quite what you may expect from a RTS game. Certainly as mentioned above it requires a fair bit more planning and consideration than many other games along similar lines. The simple fact of it working on a totally different scale to other games took me a while to get to grips with. All your old RTS strategies are worthless as it works beyond the old idea of simply being the first person/player to rush the other base with superior numbers. You really do need to use several different strands of attack in harmony or fail horribly. Rush a base with a squadron of tanks, but ensure they have support from anti-aircraft gunners or bombers will obliterate them. Forget to add some fast moving robotic grunt units and you'll find your tanks swamped by fast attack units. And so on. I would say if you are after fast and furious, low-brow but fun gameplay go for CnC. If you want something with depth and really time consuming strategy, get Supreme Commander. __________________ \|\| The Workhorse: MBP 2.16..2gb 667..150GB HDD \|\| Chocolate Microscope \|\| My Zoundz \|\| XBL: mookboy \|\|

14th Apr 2007, 20:54	#2
Cabe64 Cabutron Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Glasgow, Scotland Posts: 688	I've played both and in my opinion C&C3 is the one to go for. Its fantastic.

14th Apr 2007, 21:45	#3
capnPedro Deaf forever to the battle's din Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: North-East England Posts: 2,983	I've been playing the demos today. I like the sound of Supreme Commander, but in the end I just can't get into it. C&C3 is for me; I liked the previous games (especially Red Alert) and the demo is amazing. My only niggle is you can't zoom out far enough. I wasn't expecting an overview like in SupCom, but just a tad more would have been nice.

14th Apr 2007, 23:42	#8
Neogumbercules Ultramodder Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Connecticut Posts: 1,494	Supreme Command is really fun and pretty cool, but gets boring really quickly. CnC3 is really fun and pretty cool, and doesn't get boring as fast. __________________ Abit AB9 Pro, Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 CPU, 2GB Corsair DDR2 6400, nVidia 8800GT, Seagate 160 GB HDD.

15th Apr 2007, 18:52	#9
OtakuHawk Hypermodder Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Chicago Posts: 659	just to let you know, you're comparing Chess to Checkers here. One is a long game that places importance on strategic planning, the other places importance on micromanagement and speed. I'm not dissin either game, as I like both, but don't think you can say either is superior to the other, because they are apples and oranges. __________________ Ultra-Lurker

15th Apr 2007, 20:04	#10
Mosey Multimodder Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 194	I havent really played that much supcom but i'm with C&C3. It's pretty sweet! __________________ My old Rig [AMD 4800x2] [ASUS A8N-SLI SE] [512 Radeon X1900 XT] [1G Corsair XMS3200C2 Pro] [X-Fi Xtrememusic] [74gb Western Digital] [300gb Maxtor]

16th Apr 2007, 20:46	#13
BioSniper I Mod, Therefore I Own Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Somewhere in the south Posts: 3,454	I'm a sup com man, I find games like C&C3 breed rushers which I detest :P __________________ My Flickr :: Bit-tech Flickr Wii: 1792 1527 2926 7945 :: Xbox Live: BioSnipr :: PSN: Biosnipr

17th Apr 2007, 02:58	#14
Neogumbercules Ultramodder Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Connecticut Posts: 1,494	Rushing is a pretty popular strategy in CnC3. I have a lot of fun in 3v3 games because then tend to last a pretty long time and usually end with a clash of epic proportions. Kinda like supcom but it doesn't take 2 hours to get there. I like supcom, but its just so damn slow. __________________ Abit AB9 Pro, Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 CPU, 2GB Corsair DDR2 6400, nVidia 8800GT, Seagate 160 GB HDD.

17th Apr 2007, 20:44	#15
OtakuHawk Hypermodder Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Chicago Posts: 659	and for those of you who think supcom is slow, play smaller maps, like open palms. __________________ Ultra-Lurker

21st Apr 2007, 10:53	#19
tacticus Supermodder Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Melbourne Australia (woot) Posts: 360	You do not just walk into Mordor unless you are a Galactic Colossus Sup Com for the Scale Sup Com because isn’t it fun seeing someone try and kill you with t1 bombers Sup Com because nothing says loving like your Sup Com packing a tactical nuke or 2 > Sup Com because stealth battleships and artillery destroy stuff Sup Com because artillery can fire a resonable distance __________________ Creativity and innovation always builds on the past. The past always tries to control the creativity that builds upon it. Free societies enable the future by limiting this power of the past. Ours is less and less a free society.

21st Apr 2007, 22:35	#20
scq Hypermodder Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 783	I was never into RTS until I started playing Company of Heroes, which I loved. My friend suggested I try C&C3, (I had played a little Red Alert 2 before, and didn't like it much). I played the demo of C&C 3, and while I can see where the novelty is for C&C fans, I didn't like it. The whole game is just build up units, send over a mob. I guess that's just the nature of the macro game. It's not really strategy as much as resource management. You either race to build up mammoth tanks, or some kind of one-shot-and-win superweapon. I haven't played Supreme Commander, but I've heard it's super complicated. Personally, I'm sticking with CoH for now. A great balance of micro and resource management.