


Red Alert 3 expansion pack announced!
#351
Posted 17 March 2009 - 17:57


#352
Posted 17 March 2009 - 17:59
#355
Posted 17 March 2009 - 19:08
Zhen, on 17 Mar 2009, 19:25, said:
Because they've usually been slow, tough and hard-hitting rather than light, thin-skinned and more annoying than powerful.
This bike is something you'd see in Generals as a GLA unit and the Soviets are certainly not an RA equivalent of the GLA.
Edited by Rayburn, 17 March 2009 - 19:09.
#356
Posted 17 March 2009 - 19:25
Sergeant Major J. Kid, on 17 Mar 2009, 19:05, said:




Quote
Well the Soviets seemed a bit of both in RA2 plus the Rhino Tank beats Grizzlies and the Lasher. And not to forget the dreaded conscript spam...

#358
Posted 17 March 2009 - 19:58
#359
Posted 18 March 2009 - 12:48
Rayburn, on 17 Mar 2009, 19:58, said:
Rayburn, on 17 Mar 2009, 17:59, said:
Couldn't have put it better myself. The old problem with RA3 rears it's head again. Nice game to play poorly designed/conceived.
#360
Posted 18 March 2009 - 12:54
Still, the concept isn't bad. Just... yeah.
Edited by RaiDK, 18 March 2009 - 12:54.
Masonicon, on 17 Oct 2009, 13:44, said:
#361
Posted 18 March 2009 - 14:47

#363
Posted 18 March 2009 - 16:35
Oh yea, please, please exclude the Terror Drone and Flak Track.

#364
Posted 18 March 2009 - 17:00

#365
Posted 18 March 2009 - 17:16

Well, considering the "Sea Scorpion" of RA3 is amphibious and even launches people out of it's cannon...(Yes, the SS's Flak Cannon in RA2 looked exactly like the Mancannon except it only launches flak, which even hits ground units, where the BF's flaknnon can't.)...I don't really have much to say.
...for the squids...does the RA3 Terror Drone's swimming look almost identical to the Squid's?


#366
Posted 18 March 2009 - 17:27
JJ, on 18 Mar 2009, 16:57, said:
I meant to say that in YR they also had a fast (or at least, faster then the Soviet average) attack unit which could deal out a lot of damage to counter the global slowness of the whole Soviet army. Not that you would see this as a valid point, because YR ain't a good C&C game according to you.
Now I mention this: why do ppl at PPM don't see Generals as a C&C game, while it's the opposite here... It's never right


#367
Posted 18 March 2009 - 17:30
Also, do note the Siege Chopper raped infantry and vehicles like they were Terror Drones, gah.
Edit: So...the "true" C&C game would be TD? I don't see everyone playing it, though.

Edited by Destiny, 18 March 2009 - 17:41.

#368
Posted 18 March 2009 - 23:37
they have Sickles, Terror drones and Twinblades and there pretty good for hit and run tactics.
RA2 they had Flak-Tracks, Terror drones and in YR Siege Choppers. so if anything, i find them pretty Fitting for the Soviets.
also:
Quote
I dont know but i found that rather funny.

and you can construct in from the barracks as long as you have a War factory. i think that is pretty neat.
#369
Posted 19 March 2009 - 00:24

#370
Posted 19 March 2009 - 02:56
Dutchygamer, on 19 Mar 2009, 1:27, said:
JJ, on 18 Mar 2009, 16:57, said:
I meant to say that in YR they also had a fast (or at least, faster then the Soviet average) attack unit which could deal out a lot of damage to counter the global slowness of the whole Soviet army. Not that you would see this as a valid point, because YR ain't a good C&C game according to you.
Now I mention this: why do ppl at PPM don't see Generals as a C&C game, while it's the opposite here... It's never right

Just because something bad is done before doesn't justify it.
Generals isn't a C&C game, I agree, but it's gameplay mechanics is way better than other C&Cs.
#371
Posted 19 March 2009 - 02:59
#372
Posted 19 March 2009 - 23:23
JJ, on 19 Mar 2009, 3:56, said:
Dutchygamer, on 19 Mar 2009, 1:27, said:
JJ, on 18 Mar 2009, 16:57, said:
I meant to say that in YR they also had a fast (or at least, faster then the Soviet average) attack unit which could deal out a lot of damage to counter the global slowness of the whole Soviet army. Not that you would see this as a valid point, because YR ain't a good C&C game according to you.
Now I mention this: why do ppl at PPM don't see Generals as a C&C game, while it's the opposite here... It's never right

Just because something bad is done before doesn't justify it.
Generals isn't a C&C game, I agree, but it's gameplay mechanics is way better than other C&Cs.
Generals has the subtitle C&C above it and thus it is a CnC game, simply said.
And it's the best out there as well.

#373
Posted 20 March 2009 - 00:30
The Gigtress looks very OP in the screens. Those...missiles...are they hitting structures too?

#374
Posted 20 March 2009 - 00:54
If anything is OP it'd be the Pacifier or Future Tank.

#375
Posted 20 March 2009 - 06:37

2 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users