🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sun, 1 Feb 2004 02:57:56 +0000 (UTC), Ablang
<RockingHilaryDuff@ablang-duff.com> wrote:

>    	I'm not kidding.  Tiberian Sun is the best of the C&C/Red Alert 
>series!  Why?  Other games claimed that you would have to have a diverse 
>balance of units, but TS is the only game that meant it.  In the C&C/Red 
>Alert series, it always came down to tank rushes, or air strikes. 
>
>    	Does anyone agree with me?     	

The game balance with Tiberium Sun is still in question.  Air units
(especially Orca Bombers and Banshees) are extremely difficult to
counter when used in large numbers.  While an experienced player might
not have trouble, as few as five bombers can mess up an enemy player
by hitting a critical building.  

In the same way, TS suffers from the tank-rush/air-strike problem as
well (although infantry rushes also appear in the early parts of the
match.)  There aren't many games that overcome this minor limitation,
but can be found when you look for them.  

> Plus, 
>I'll bet that the TS games, are where the Brotherhood of NOD are heavily 
>favored.  They got those long-range big guns that killed many of my units.  

The NOD artillery was a major game balance issue, that rendered ground
attacks to be useless.  This was only corrected in Firestorm, and was
also balanced by giving GDI the Juggernaut artillery. 

>The TS games are the hardest of any series I have ever played.  

I'd agree with TS being the toughest.  In C&C/RA, the AI player tended
to be less advances, or fell for a few simple tricks.   TS is much
better, as the AI player actually builds a strongly defended base and
attack force that can cripple an unprepared player.

It went downhill after the TS installment - RA2 had a joke AI that
could easily be crushed with only 3 prism tanks (some players reported
defeating it on american paratroopers along).  Generals was the same,
although AI problems might have been fixed in the expansion.  

You can look at Emperor: Battle for Dune - similar in difficulty
compared to TS, although not played as much.  The AI player is fairly
aggressive, but can still be defeated because defences are a bit
underpowered.  

"Ablang" <RockingHilaryDuff@ablang-duff.com> wrote in message >
>     Does anyone agree with me?
>
> -- 


I don't.  red alert/ red alert aftermath are by far the best of the c&c
games in my opinion.  TS was a huge disapointment.

-- 

Margolis
http://www.agqx.org/faqs/AGQ2FAQ.htm
http://www.agqx.org/faqs/AGQ3FAQ.htm
http://www.agutng.org.uk/

In article <101p6tddeclsa03@corp.supernews.com>, but only after serious
contemplation, Margolis <someone@somewhere.org> put finger to keyboard
and produced the following;
>"Ablang" <RockingHilaryDuff@ablang-duff.com> wrote in message >
>>     Does anyone agree with me?
>>
>> -- 
>
>
>I don't.  red alert/ red alert aftermath are by far the best of the c&c
>games in my opinion.  TS was a huge disapointment.

I agree with that - for single player (I haven't played enough multi-
player games to comment on that aspect). The only game to match RA was
the original C&C.

The thing that made the C&C games stand out from the crowd that followed
was the plot (and the quality of the videos). TS was the first in the
series to abandon the "individual briefing" format and, as a result,
lost the C&C feel. RA2 tried to get that back with limited success - the
format was right but an element of childishness was introduced to the
graphics and gamely. Generals (which I am now halfway through) is even
worse in that respect - brightly coloured cartoon characters flying
through the air when their vehicle is destroyed is so "naff" as to be
laughable. So far I'm (just) managing to suspend my disbelief - but I
very much doubt that I'll be buying any further titles in this series.

-- 
Cheers,

Chas.

"Reality leaves a lot to the imagination".

"Ablang" <RockingHilaryDuff@ablang-duff.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9481C11A5884B01312004@195.131.52.135...
>     I'm not kidding.  Tiberian Sun is the best of the C&C/Red Alert
> series!  Why?  Other games claimed that you would have to have a diverse
> balance of units, but TS is the only game that meant it.  In the C&C/Red
> Alert series, it always came down to tank rushes, or air strikes.  Plus,
> I'll bet that the TS games, are where the Brotherhood of NOD are heavily
> favored.  They got those long-range big guns that killed many of my units.
> Plus, a large assortment of laser guns.  The TS games are the hardest of
> any series I have ever played.
>
>     Does anyone agree with me?
>
> -- 
> "Hilary Duff is the covergirl for an international youth industry" -- 
> Unknown
>
> View the countdown for when Hilary Duff turns 18 (I know you're waiting
for
> it):
>
http://www.timeanddate.com/counters/customcounter.html?day=28&month=09&year
> =2005&hour=00&m
>
> The next T-shirt slogan (seriously): "Is it chicken or is it tuna?"

OK.  I assume you mean TS multiplayer is the hardest?

Of the games i have played (C&C, RA, RA2, TS), i found C&C to have the best
single player games (RA was good, but not best).  For multiplayer, it is
split between C&C and TS, but only because TS is more modern, so more
flexible (ie three can allie together against the AI).
I will always find the Orca helicopter to be my best unit.  The devastation
of an Ion cannon and Orca attack on a Construction Yard won many a battle
for me.

Yes RA was all about tank rushes. so i never played multiplayer. stayed with
C&C, then jumped to TS.

My hopeless dream? C&C upgraded to modern multiplayer capabilities.

-- 
Fight Win Prevail
But Never Cheat

"Raymond Martineau" <bk039@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote in message
news:rdvo10ddnis18s8e9puonvt0k2dcfn57mb@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 1 Feb 2004 02:57:56 +0000 (UTC), Ablang
> <RockingHilaryDuff@ablang-duff.com> wrote:
>
> >    I'm not kidding.  Tiberian Sun is the best of the C&C/Red Alert
> >series!  Why?  Other games claimed that you would have to have a diverse
> >balance of units, but TS is the only game that meant it.  In the C&C/Red
> >Alert series, it always came down to tank rushes, or air strikes.
> >
> >    Does anyone agree with me?
>
> The game balance with Tiberium Sun is still in question.  Air units
> (especially Orca Bombers and Banshees) are extremely difficult to
> counter when used in large numbers.  While an experienced player might
> not have trouble, as few as five bombers can mess up an enemy player
> by hitting a critical building.
>
> In the same way, TS suffers from the tank-rush/air-strike problem as
> well (although infantry rushes also appear in the early parts of the
> match.)  There aren't many games that overcome this minor limitation,
> but can be found when you look for them.
>
> > Plus,
> >I'll bet that the TS games, are where the Brotherhood of NOD are heavily
> >favored.  They got those long-range big guns that killed many of my
units.
>
> The NOD artillery was a major game balance issue, that rendered ground
> attacks to be useless.  This was only corrected in Firestorm, and was
> also balanced by giving GDI the Juggernaut artillery.
>
> >The TS games are the hardest of any series I have ever played.
>
> I'd agree with TS being the toughest.  In C&C/RA, the AI player tended
> to be less advances, or fell for a few simple tricks.   TS is much
> better, as the AI player actually builds a strongly defended base and
> attack force that can cripple an unprepared player.
>
> It went downhill after the TS installment - RA2 had a joke AI that
> could easily be crushed with only 3 prism tanks (some players reported
> defeating it on american paratroopers along).  Generals was the same,
> although AI problems might have been fixed in the expansion.
>
> You can look at Emperor: Battle for Dune - similar in difficulty
> compared to TS, although not played as much.  The AI player is fairly
> aggressive, but can still be defeated because defences are a bit
> underpowered.


good analysis. the only areas i disagree with:

1) GDI Juggernaut arty stinks.  such wide spread pattern dilutes the affect.
The only good thing about it? takes out repair bots that follow attacking
vehicles too close.

2) AI base defense.  I found if you take out the construction yard, it is
all downhill from there. attrition the SAM's, you just pound them with air
units.  The AI best part? In skirmish taking on 6 of them, and trying to
defend against them all. That is a challenge.  Or taking on 6 of them with a
friend. They attack and attack early.

-- 
Fight Win Prevail
But Never Cheat

"The Arcane Chas" <Chas@the-arcane.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:oVs$DKAxWPHAFw35@the-arcane.demon.co.uk...
> In article <101p6tddeclsa03@corp.supernews.com>, but only after serious
> contemplation, Margolis <someone@somewhere.org> put finger to keyboard
> and produced the following;
> >"Ablang" <RockingHilaryDuff@ablang-duff.com> wrote in message >
> >>     Does anyone agree with me?
> >>
> >> -- 
> >
> >
> >I don't.  red alert/ red alert aftermath are by far the best of the c&c
> >games in my opinion.  TS was a huge disapointment.
>
> I agree with that - for single player (I haven't played enough multi-
> player games to comment on that aspect). The only game to match RA was
> the original C&C.
>
> The thing that made the C&C games stand out from the crowd that followed
> was the plot (and the quality of the videos). TS was the first in the
> series to abandon the "individual briefing" format and, as a result,
> lost the C&C feel. RA2 tried to get that back with limited success - the
> format was right but an element of childishness was introduced to the
> graphics and gamely. Generals (which I am now halfway through) is even
> worse in that respect - brightly coloured cartoon characters flying
> through the air when their vehicle is destroyed is so "naff" as to be
> laughable. So far I'm (just) managing to suspend my disbelief - but I
> very much doubt that I'll be buying any further titles in this series.
>
> -- 
> Cheers,
>
> Chas.

The single player did stink, greatly. I have been playin multiplayer
(exclusively with friends against the AI) for about 2 years now, never grow
tired of it.
What i hated about the TS videos was the ending. Kane died off camera. such
a disappointment. no walls falling on him, or Ion cannon taking him out.

-- 
Fight Win Prevail
But Never Cheat

"TCipollina" <joesdad@stny.rr.com> wrote in message
news:8RaTb.13040$iJ3.11536@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> "Raymond Martineau" <bk039@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote in message
> news:rdvo10ddnis18s8e9puonvt0k2dcfn57mb@4ax.com...
> > On Sun, 1 Feb 2004 02:57:56 +0000 (UTC), Ablang
> > <RockingHilaryDuff@ablang-duff.com> wrote:
> >
> > >    I'm not kidding.  Tiberian Sun is the best of the C&C/Red Alert
> > >series!  Why?  Other games claimed that you would have to have a
diverse
> > >balance of units, but TS is the only game that meant it.  In the
C&C/Red
> > >Alert series, it always came down to tank rushes, or air strikes.
> > >
> > >    Does anyone agree with me?
> >
> > The game balance with Tiberium Sun is still in question.  Air units
> > (especially Orca Bombers and Banshees) are extremely difficult to
> > counter when used in large numbers.  While an experienced player might
> > not have trouble, as few as five bombers can mess up an enemy player
> > by hitting a critical building.
> >
> > In the same way, TS suffers from the tank-rush/air-strike problem as
> > well (although infantry rushes also appear in the early parts of the
> > match.)  There aren't many games that overcome this minor limitation,
> > but can be found when you look for them.
> >
> > > Plus,
> > >I'll bet that the TS games, are where the Brotherhood of NOD are
heavily
> > >favored.  They got those long-range big guns that killed many of my
> units.
> >
> > The NOD artillery was a major game balance issue, that rendered ground
> > attacks to be useless.  This was only corrected in Firestorm, and was
> > also balanced by giving GDI the Juggernaut artillery.
> >
> > >The TS games are the hardest of any series I have ever played.
> >
> > I'd agree with TS being the toughest.  In C&C/RA, the AI player tended
> > to be less advances, or fell for a few simple tricks.   TS is much
> > better, as the AI player actually builds a strongly defended base and
> > attack force that can cripple an unprepared player.
> >
> > It went downhill after the TS installment - RA2 had a joke AI that
> > could easily be crushed with only 3 prism tanks (some players reported
> > defeating it on american paratroopers along).  Generals was the same,
> > although AI problems might have been fixed in the expansion.
> >
> > You can look at Emperor: Battle for Dune - similar in difficulty
> > compared to TS, although not played as much.  The AI player is fairly
> > aggressive, but can still be defeated because defences are a bit
> > underpowered.
>
>
> good analysis. the only areas i disagree with:
>
> 1) GDI Juggernaut arty stinks.  such wide spread pattern dilutes the
affect.
> The only good thing about it? takes out repair bots that follow attacking
> vehicles too close.

It does have one other advantange, it's so noisy if you station one at the
fringe you get an early warning of attack. ;-)

>
> 2) AI base defense.  I found if you take out the construction yard, it is
> all downhill from there. attrition the SAM's, you just pound them with air
> units.  The AI best part? In skirmish taking on 6 of them, and trying to
> defend against them all. That is a challenge.  Or taking on 6 of them with
a
> friend. They attack and attack early.
>
> --
> Fight Win Prevail
> But Never Cheat
>
>

On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 17:39:16 GMT, "TCipollina" <joesdad@stny.rr.com>
wrote:

>
>1) GDI Juggernaut arty stinks.  such wide spread pattern dilutes the affect.
>The only good thing about it? takes out repair bots that follow attacking
>vehicles too close.

GDI artillery is better off to take on Base structures or large
defence structures (e.g. oblisk), when compared to NOD arillery.  When
atacking base structures, it does slightly more damage per second
(although this benefit is minor.)

It's also slightly better at performing on incoming infantry armies -
it performs light damage is performed over a wide area.  This is
better than NOD artillery, where semi-light damage is performed at a
single point.  

NOD artillery, however, is better at counter-battery attacks or
attacks on stationary units (e.g. engaging a base turret). 

>
>2) AI base defense.  I found if you take out the construction yard, it is
>all downhill from there. attrition the SAM's, you just pound them with air
>units.  The AI best part? In skirmish taking on 6 of them, and trying to
>defend against them all. That is a challenge.  Or taking on 6 of them with a
>friend. They attack and attack early.

The AI player for the C&C series has generally been weak, being
incapable of efficiently using it's resources against a human player.
If you can take out any incoming attack force (assigned by a script),
you will eventually win the game.  

TS isn't as bad as RA2 - the attack forces appeared to be comparitivly
larger, and could be used to add to the base defence as well.  For
some reason, the RA2 AI engine sends out it's attack force as soon as
it's finished, without leaving anything for base defence (or, it is
leaving stuff to defend, but only defends a single point as opposed to
the entire base.)

The best methods of performing attrission against an AI (in no
particular order): Hit refineries/harvesters - he will sell off
buildings to rebuild them.  Hit Powerplants - it cuts power to
superweapons, and if enough are destroyed, buildings will get sold
off.  Hit superweapons - those tend to be expensive to replace.  

On Sun, 1 Feb 2004 12:48:49 +0000, The Arcane Chas
<Chas@the-arcane.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>
>The thing that made the C&C games stand out from the crowd that followed
>was the plot (and the quality of the videos). TS was the first in the
>series to abandon the "individual briefing" format and, as a result,
>lost the C&C feel. RA2 tried to get that back with limited success - the
>format was right but an element of childishness was introduced to the
>graphics and gamely.

Actually, it was Firestorm that brought back the individual briefing
format.  When you compare the TS briefings with FS, I can't really say
one is actually better than the other.  

RA2, on the other hand, was targeted to the pre-pubescent males and
used the first person briefing in order to make it a bit more...
personal.  

>Generals (which I am now halfway through) is even
>worse in that respect - brightly coloured cartoon characters flying
>through the air when their vehicle is destroyed is so "naff" as to be
>laughable. So far I'm (just) managing to suspend my disbelief - but I
>very much doubt that I'll be buying any further titles in this series.

I'm suprised that Red Alert 2 wasn't a red alert to the quality of the
series.  There are plenty of mistakes found in that installment that
should be kept as a record of what not to do in an RTS (although, RA2
wasn't the worst offender.)  

In article <rr3t1099usse3bhds396052cvh5oqg2dcc@4ax.com>, but only after
serious contemplation, Raymond Martineau <bk039@freenet.carleton.ca> put
finger to keyboard and produced the following;
>
>Actually, it was Firestorm that brought back the individual briefing
>format.

I'll take your word for that - I was so underwhelmed by TS I didn't
bother with Firestorm. In fact I still haven't bought it.

-- 
Cheers,

Chas.

"Reality leaves a lot to the imagination".

"The Ancient One" <onlytheone@thetopknows.com> wrote in message
news:101qhsfa1hc6keb@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "TCipollina" <joesdad@stny.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:8RaTb.13040$iJ3.11536@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> > "Raymond Martineau" <bk039@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote in message
> > news:rdvo10ddnis18s8e9puonvt0k2dcfn57mb@4ax.com...
> > > On Sun, 1 Feb 2004 02:57:56 +0000 (UTC), Ablang
> > > <RockingHilaryDuff@ablang-duff.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >    I'm not kidding.  Tiberian Sun is the best of the C&C/Red Alert
> > > >series!  Why?  Other games claimed that you would have to have a
> diverse
> > > >balance of units, but TS is the only game that meant it.  In the
> C&C/Red
> > > >Alert series, it always came down to tank rushes, or air strikes.
> > > >
> > > >    Does anyone agree with me?
> > >
> > > The game balance with Tiberium Sun is still in question.  Air units
> > > (especially Orca Bombers and Banshees) are extremely difficult to
> > > counter when used in large numbers.  While an experienced player might
> > > not have trouble, as few as five bombers can mess up an enemy player
> > > by hitting a critical building.
> > >
> > > In the same way, TS suffers from the tank-rush/air-strike problem as
> > > well (although infantry rushes also appear in the early parts of the
> > > match.)  There aren't many games that overcome this minor limitation,
> > > but can be found when you look for them.
> > >
> > > > Plus,
> > > >I'll bet that the TS games, are where the Brotherhood of NOD are
> heavily
> > > >favored.  They got those long-range big guns that killed many of my
> > units.
> > >
> > > The NOD artillery was a major game balance issue, that rendered ground
> > > attacks to be useless.  This was only corrected in Firestorm, and was
> > > also balanced by giving GDI the Juggernaut artillery.
> > >
> > > >The TS games are the hardest of any series I have ever played.
> > >
> > > I'd agree with TS being the toughest.  In C&C/RA, the AI player tended
> > > to be less advances, or fell for a few simple tricks.   TS is much
> > > better, as the AI player actually builds a strongly defended base and
> > > attack force that can cripple an unprepared player.
> > >
> > > It went downhill after the TS installment - RA2 had a joke AI that
> > > could easily be crushed with only 3 prism tanks (some players reported
> > > defeating it on american paratroopers along).  Generals was the same,
> > > although AI problems might have been fixed in the expansion.
> > >
> > > You can look at Emperor: Battle for Dune - similar in difficulty
> > > compared to TS, although not played as much.  The AI player is fairly
> > > aggressive, but can still be defeated because defences are a bit
> > > underpowered.
> >
> >
> > good analysis. the only areas i disagree with:
> >
> > 1) GDI Juggernaut arty stinks.  such wide spread pattern dilutes the
> affect.
> > The only good thing about it? takes out repair bots that follow
attacking
> > vehicles too close.
>
> It does have one other advantange, it's so noisy if you station one at the
> fringe you get an early warning of attack. ;-)
>
> >
> > 2) AI base defense.  I found if you take out the construction yard, it
is
> > all downhill from there. attrition the SAM's, you just pound them with
air
> > units.  The AI best part? In skirmish taking on 6 of them, and trying to
> > defend against them all. That is a challenge.  Or taking on 6 of them
with
> a
> > friend. They attack and attack early.
> >
> > --
> > Fight Win Prevail
> > But Never Cheat
> >

good point, i like that.
-- 
Fight Win Prevail
But Never Cheat

"Raymond Martineau" <bk039@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote in message
news:jsfr10lcsj51o0at16sc8vhulqs5ttv31c@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 17:39:16 GMT, "TCipollina" <joesdad@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >1) GDI Juggernaut arty stinks.  such wide spread pattern dilutes the
affect.
> >The only good thing about it? takes out repair bots that follow attacking
> >vehicles too close.
>
> GDI artillery is better off to take on Base structures or large
> defence structures (e.g. oblisk), when compared to NOD arillery.  When
> atacking base structures, it does slightly more damage per second
> (although this benefit is minor.)
>
> It's also slightly better at performing on incoming infantry armies -
> it performs light damage is performed over a wide area.  This is
> better than NOD artillery, where semi-light damage is performed at a
> single point.
>
> NOD artillery, however, is better at counter-battery attacks or
> attacks on stationary units (e.g. engaging a base turret).
>
> >
> >2) AI base defense.  I found if you take out the construction yard, it is
> >all downhill from there. attrition the SAM's, you just pound them with
air
> >units.  The AI best part? In skirmish taking on 6 of them, and trying to
> >defend against them all. That is a challenge.  Or taking on 6 of them
with a
> >friend. They attack and attack early.
>
> The AI player for the C&C series has generally been weak, being
> incapable of efficiently using it's resources against a human player.
> If you can take out any incoming attack force (assigned by a script),
> you will eventually win the game.
>
> TS isn't as bad as RA2 - the attack forces appeared to be comparitivly
> larger, and could be used to add to the base defence as well.  For
> some reason, the RA2 AI engine sends out it's attack force as soon as
> it's finished, without leaving anything for base defence (or, it is
> leaving stuff to defend, but only defends a single point as opposed to
> the entire base.)
>
> The best methods of performing attrission against an AI (in no
> particular order): Hit refineries/harvesters - he will sell off
> buildings to rebuild them.  Hit Powerplants - it cuts power to
> superweapons, and if enough are destroyed, buildings will get sold
> off.  Hit superweapons - those tend to be expensive to replace.
>
cannot argue with great logic like that.
keep it going, General

-- 
Fight Win Prevail
But Never Cheat

"Raymond Martineau" <bk039@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote in message
news:rr3t1099usse3bhds396052cvh5oqg2dcc@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 1 Feb 2004 12:48:49 +0000, The Arcane Chas
> <Chas@the-arcane.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >
> >The thing that made the C&C games stand out from the crowd that followed
> >was the plot (and the quality of the videos). TS was the first in the
> >series to abandon the "individual briefing" format and, as a result,
> >lost the C&C feel. RA2 tried to get that back with limited success - the
> >format was right but an element of childishness was introduced to the
> >graphics and gamely.
>
> Actually, it was Firestorm that brought back the individual briefing
> format.  When you compare the TS briefings with FS, I can't really say
> one is actually better than the other.
>
> RA2, on the other hand, was targeted to the pre-pubescent males and
> used the first person briefing in order to make it a bit more...
> personal.
>
> >Generals (which I am now halfway through) is even
> >worse in that respect - brightly coloured cartoon characters flying
> >through the air when their vehicle is destroyed is so "naff" as to be
> >laughable. So far I'm (just) managing to suspend my disbelief - but I
> >very much doubt that I'll be buying any further titles in this series.
>
> I'm suprised that Red Alert 2 wasn't a red alert to the quality of the
> series.  There are plenty of mistakes found in that installment that
> should be kept as a record of what not to do in an RTS (although, RA2
> wasn't the worst offender.)


the old "up close and personal trick"
(Maxwell Smart)


-- 
Fight Win Prevail
But Never Cheat

On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 01:01:50 GMT, "TCipollina" <joesdad@stny.rr.com>
wrote:

>the old "up close and personal trick"
>(Maxwell Smart)

Only in the final mission/outro... :)