Fallout Studios Forums

All I can say is that Uprising is a good expansion if you like RA3. I love it

Mortar Bike? A fast hit and run artillery unit for the Soviets? Hooray for inconsistent faction design!

Rayburn, on 17 Mar 2009, 17:59, said:

I don't see how that's inconsistent? Soviets dominate the land so why can't they get a hit run unit?

Could you post some pics of the Allied future tank?

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.

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...

Lol wat?
That looks like a mech, more than a tank o_O What do it does?

Looks a bit like those tracked fighting machines from the Terminator series...

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.

The mortar bike looks a lot better than I thought it would, but yeah... The slow and heavy Soviets get a fast attack unit?

Still, the concept isn't bad. Just... yeah.
Edited by RaiDK, 18 March 2009 - 12:54.

Seems some of you forget the Soviet Siege Chopper from Yuri's Revenge...

Dutchygamer, on 18 Mar 2009, 22:47, said:

Your point? Yuri's Revenge was never a particularly good C&C anyway.

I'm sure Dutchy's point is that, with the Soviets having the traditional [insert the faction style we all know too well here], having a OMFGITSAFLYINGARTILLERYPIECEWEREGONNAGETDEADFROMABOVERUN already borked the Soviet's [Insert etc.] already. No point making it worser by binding it to the ground in RA3, yes?

Oh yea, please, please exclude the Terror Drone and Flak Track.

Sea Scorpian? Mind controlled squids? (Okay they weren't ground units but they still count as 'fast')

Heck, they should include the Cosmonaut


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?

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

I'd put that in the GD or SYD, but...well. I can say I'm a hybrid of both RA2-YR and Gens-ZH.


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.

i dont really see the mortar cycle as inconsistent.
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.

they dont really have a big range for a mortal, and they fit in the soviet army in the fact you need a lot of them to be actually effective......unless the conscript dont fit the soviet army now

Dutchygamer, on 19 Mar 2009, 1:27, said:

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.

Why do all of the Soviet units have to be slow and strong? It's not like the Allies have the fast and light theme. It's good that there are a few units to break the monotony and I for one like the design of this vehicle. I doubt its that effective at Hit and Run anyway except at infantry probably.

JJ, on 19 Mar 2009, 3:56, said:

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.

We're deviating from RA3...dudes, we should be going forward, not backwards in SAGE-rgy!

The Gigtress looks very OP in the screens. Those...missiles...are they hitting structures too?

In watermode it can hit everything, in air mode only ground surprisingly the Giga fortress is not that op since it can be taken down very quickly however it packs alot of damage. You have to tech upto T3 docks and build the Nanotech mainframe and it costs around 6.3k to build the core and it takes around 2mins to complete the giga fortress.

If anything is OP it'd be the Pacifier or Future Tank.

What the...6.3k?! 2 MINUTES?! Woah. I can see the Pacifier being OP as it has no buildlimit...plus the damage it deals is...damn.