Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Gben

C&C4 Beta - CNCNZ Mini-Roundtable?

Recommended Posts

Hi fellow beta-testers, I am thinking that once APOC brings in the RA3 Beta keys we can probably make the forums open. APOC & Sonic will know whether we can go public, but I am thinking it will be sooner rather than later. And I am thinking it would be good to have some sort of official article based on our experience...

 

I've been working on questions to prod everyone's experience. How a quick squiz below, don't answer, just check if there are any points or questions you feel we should all respond too?

Once we all agree on the questions, next step is to determine the best way to present the answers. We could format this as an article (ie. roundtable) or re-edit this thread to show just questions and answers, making it a sticky in the forums - with just one post each answering the questions until other people read and post in it.

 

(Re: Sticky. We could just make one post to answer the questions below, and keep editing/refining the posts until the beta is public, to keep it simple. Then I would edit this post, delete this section and just insert my answers below.)

 

Which do you prefer?

 

(The points under the main headings would be invisible to the readers, they are intended to guide your thoughts only.)

 

==========================================

 

Several C&C regulars were given early access to the C&C4 Beta testing. With the imminent arrival of RA3 Premium Edition Beta Key Owners, we felt it would be worthwhile to highlight some of our experiences from the past few weeks below.

 

Here each one of us will give a brief description of our background and expectations before heading into the game, then comments on our experience and recommendation for new beta testers.

 

Background

-------------------------------

- SP v MP

- Years experience

- MP RTS competitive experience

- other

 

Expectations

-------------------------------

- opinion on the new gameplay mechanics before testing etc)

- maybe cut & paste any relevant information from the original thread or post a short summary

- other

 

Experience

-------------------------------

- No of games played, difficulty getting a game, stability of game, technical aspects of running the game, experience/no of games

- is the game fast, fluid & fun, is the new game mechanic intuitive and easy to learn

- describe teamplay mechanics, difference between 5v5 and 1v1

- fav crawler, fav units, fav tactics, OP & UP units

- comment on lethality, cp points, upgrades, economy

- comment on crawler system compared with C&C, then compared with other IP; will it appeal to new/old players

- comment on EALA's responses to beta feedback

- other

 

Recommendations

-------------------------------

- things to explore and test

- basic tactics & tips

- known bugs and issues

- should you buy this game? / why should you buy this game?

- other

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah this sounds like a plan.

 

Just have to make sure answers and such are only related to the current reversion. No point talking about how there weren't any crystals, "back in the good old days"... :P

Share this post


Link to post

So Okay, based on troopzor's comment about RA3 beta owners, looks like we should do this soon.

Did we decide on round-table or just a stickied thread?

 

Either way, post your feedback here in this thread, and I'll edit/delete all the introduction/explanation stuff.

Share this post


Link to post

Malevolence Report on C&C4 Beta

Background (Me)

-------------------------------

- SP>MP gamer

- Been playing C&C games since Red Alert 1.

- MP RTS competitive average experience.

- Causal gamer, hence my report will be from the perspective of a hardcore C&C enthusiast and a general causal gamer.

 

Background (Test System)

-------------------------------

- Intel Core i7 920 @ 3.2Ghz

- 6GB RAM

- 2X 640GB + 1TB hard disks

- Windows 7 Ultimate

- Nvidia GTX 260

 

Expectations (Before)

-------------------------------

- Appeal to the causal / non-competitive players as EA promised, simple gameplay, not too complicated, but not too brainless otherwise it defeats the purpose of playing.

- The fun factor must still be there. I do not want to spend some free time playing a game that is boring, repetitive and feeling of wasting time.

- The C&C factor must be there despite big changes. Yes this point will be the most controversial point I'll discuss later in depth once I've get myself trying out the beta. Every C&C fan who just heard on the new gameplay mechanism are going nuts and criticizing it, I'll keep an open mind, try it for myself to see how this new gameplay is, all 3 classes. Good or bad? I have to find it out for myself.

- Gameplay per match must not be too fast, or too long and draggy.

- I love GDI mechs, and I love the coolness and strange technology of Nod. Either side I'll have no specific preference until I tried playing both several times.

 

Experience on C&C4 Beta

-------------------------------

- Lost count on number of games played. I play regularly.

- It was hard to get decent match previously, but once beta is released to public users recently, playing from 1v1 to 5v5 is pretty easy to access.

- Difficulty getting a game, stability of game, technical aspects of running the game, experience/no of games

- The game is no doubt sticking to the "fast, fluid & fun" formula.

- I am quite sceptical with this new gameplay after I tested it. Yes there is limited basebuilding for Defensive classes, I am sold with the concept of the evolution of the MCV, from classic basebuilding to this futuristic all in one crawler MCV. But overall, as from the point of the C&C franchise, sometimes I do have the weird feeling that it does not feel like a C&C game anymore. The worst bit is the population cap. This restriction totally ruined what C&C is all about.

- I read an excerpt from The Official Guide to Command and Conquer about the old Westwood’s idea about tiberium-inspired engineering that created brand new frontiers about the evolution of base building with the ‘latest’ Computer-aided manufacturing (CAM). This is the reason for buildings rising out of the ground almost instantly. As quoted:

In this new kind of warfare, the focus is quality, not quantity, and quality here largely means the ability to deploy small numbers of excellent forces. Battles are fought in terms of hours, not weeks or years. This follows directly from the ability to deposit a very small amount of physically relocated items (primarily the MCY, with minimal fire support) that quickly become a larger force via the new Tiberium-inspired micromanufacturing techniques. This small, crack force can then focus on a seed of enemy aggression before it grows into a large, country-spanning tree, as used to happen back when nations took weeks or months to field a decent counter response.

- My point here is if there was such a technology created, why the sudden lack of it when it is so feasible, shifting to no base building when buildings can be erected so quickly with CAM?

-The new game mechanic was a bit tricky initially, for example, I could not understand what the main purpose of the tiberium crystals is when I first tried it. It took me after a long while to figure out.

- I am disappointed by the bottom-bar interface; I am appealing for a sidebar alternative though. Because of that, this adds to the point that I find the gameplay not as intuitive for a hardcore C&C enthusiast.

- No doubt teamplay mechanics are different from 1v1 all the way to 5v5. I tried all of them. I personally preferred 3v3. 5v5 is fun, but the annoying thing was the pop cap was more limiting. 1v1 is fun, but it usually ended up as a hide-and-seek game. 3v3 is a more balanced and ideal gameplay for me.

- Personally, my favorite crawler is the Nod Defensive crawler. It has the nice looks, and I enjoyed the twin curved obelisks as the defensive weapon for the deployed crawler. My favorite units are the Mastodon and the Kodiak. My favorite tactic varies from gameplay to gameplay. Usually I'll try to focus on collecting tiberium crystals which will open more options to upgrades for the team faster.

- I am fine with the lethality, cp points, and upgrades for this beta so far. No complaints.

- Unit designs. GDI seems fine. I am impressed with the units such as the impressive Mastodons and Mammoths. I am worried for Nod units so far. I am not sure about the Nod engineer shape but it sure looks humorous, if this was a RA3 unit yes it would be qualified but for a C&C4 unit, I am not sure. Yes Nod contains strange and weird technology but I am not sure if but designing the Nod engineer in this shape does it even qualified to be Nod style. Another thing which is very disturbing is the overly large rocket pods found on bikes, and rocket cyborgs. It looks silly. The Avatar has to be redesigned. It looks flawed badly. I recommend the designers to look back to the good C&C3 Tiberium Wars' Avatar design, and work from there. I wish to see the "Commandeering" ability back with an improved twist. I suggest that maybe in C&C4, this new Avatar should have limbs capable of not just ripping off Nod systems but also capable of ripping off GDI and other opponents' weapon systems.

- With regards to graphics, I feel that the armor of units have become too bulky-looking, which affects the ‘seriousness’ of the game, and they look very RA3-like. Oversized Zone troopers just like the unpractical tesla trooper in RA3 seems too fake in a real-world context, (which cnc4 is supposed to be). It is hard to imagine how such bulky soldiers can actually run around the battlefield fighting a war.

- comment on EALA's responses have been pretty alright. I'm looking forward to hear the decisions for the bottombar issue. I'm sure many of us are looking forward for a valid and good reason for the decision made.

 

Recommendations

-------------------------------

- "Should I buy this game? Why?" Well, yes, no doubt this still deserved to be a C&C game, despite some things which I was kind of disappointed about, for example, bottombar interface.

- The bottombar and sidebar issue. Here's a suggestion I mentioned quite a while back. I call this a "Best of both worlds" concept. Basically you make these interface the same manner as windows on the OS. By doing so, players can choose to put and rearrange their bars to their desired preference. In this way, this will please all fans, be it those who prefer bottom bar interface, or the classic fans who want sidebar interface.

 

Share this post


Link to post

Background

-------------------------------

- SP > MP

- My first C&C was C&C95. Got every C&C since except Sole Survivor.

- Don't play multi-player very much at all, I find it uninteresting. Have minor experience with YR and TW in online matches, virtually everything else is negligible.

- Made a few maps for RA1, then got heavily into modding in YR.

 

Expectations

-------------------------------

- Was skeptical of the new mechanics as I got into the series for what it was and never thought the style became old.

- I thought that although everything was changing, it would still be fun to some degree.

- I went in with an open mind toward the new C&C formula/

 

Experience

-------------------------------

- I played less than ten games, a few times I could not get into a game, but it did not concern me.

- The teamwork is required in more than 1vs1, a poor ally will bring you down. The pop cap means that you cannot work twice as hard to overcome your ally's incompetence.

- Choice of best crawler is really dependant on your enemies' choices. The units are unappealing. The tactics are limited. In one game, all my Nod enemies spent all their command points on engineers and Salamanders... that was a very difficult game to win (which I did), 12-16 Salamanders dropping fire on your forces is a quick death, even on Crawlers.

- Lethality is lower than the ~one-hit kills in C&C3, which is good, but they took it too far. Command points are stupid. Upgrades are uninteresting, I usually nabbed two or three, then ignored the whole concept for the rest of the match. The economy, what little there is, is stupid.

- The Crawler system is, unfortunately, far worse than classic C&C. If people don't like C&C, they might like Tiberian Twilight, if they like C&C, this isn't it.

- Ultimately, the disappointment in this game exceeded my worst-case scenarios in my mind. Boring is a accurate description. Very boring.

- I give Tiberian Twilight a 49/100.

 

Recommendations

-------------------------------

- Tactics & tips: get a smart ally, get an idiot enemy. Although this game is supposed to be all about tactics, it's not. Lethality is low enough you can try three different maneuvers before you lose your position, and even if you do, respawn your Crawler and take it back.

- I never encountered any significant bugs or issues, which is just as well since I was never able to access the official forums to report any.

- If you have been with C&C since the beginning, you should buy this game, at least to see how it all ends.

- Were it not a C&C game, I would not buy it myself or recommend it to anyone.

Share this post


Link to post

Background

-------------------------------

- SP = MP

- Dune II baby!

- Average

- Made a few mission maps in RA2. Did a lot of replay reviews and such for C&C3/KW over at GR.

 

Expectations

-------------------------------

- Was rather skeptical of the entire concept of the game.

- Disliked the idea of large 5v5 games, and the lag and stuff that would accompany it.

 

Experience

-------------------------------

- Played about 50 games I think maybe, most were 2v2s, later on quite a lot of 5v5 games.

- EA's new servers are great, NOT ONCE, did I ever experience any kind of lag, this was easily the highlight of the entire beta.

- In the beginning it was kinda hard to get games going with a lack of people, but that improved in time.

- Initially the game was really fun to play, but after the newness faded away, it kinda got boring, though playing the same few maps over and over will do that..

- The enjoyment in the game depends highly on your team members, get stuck with a noob, and it makes it difficult to win.

- Many players were not "team players", which can make things difficult. I'm not sure if that is just the mentality of the beta players that were online, or if it was more of a "C&C SP" mentality.

- Nod offensive class was lacking a decent anti small unit, which is very apparent in offensive vs defensive 1v1 battles. IE, you will lose.

- Defence class is properly the best class to start out with as its "easier" to get the hang of and play.

- Support class can be very rewarding if played correctly, properly using your support powers and buffing and support other team members can be very cool indeed.

- Lethality has improved over the different iterations, its just about right now, maybe a few slight tweaks here and there.

- EALA response to beta feedback was rather poor when I browsed the forums, they either never replied, or APOC would turn up and close the odd thread. Whilst it did seem they were listening as things did get changed and such in future iterations, it wasn't clear from reading the forums.

- Addition of tiberium "harvesting" for upgrades was OK I suppose.

- In comparison with RA3, units have far less options available to them, secondary abilities are rare and far inbetween.

- Elite and experienced units are very valuable as they are much more effective, worth while keeping them around.

- Maps were rather lacklustre, needed more features and such.

- Online lobbies are a massive step backwards, not being able to see who is around and us the / commands.

- Autokick, great idea in theory, horribly implemented in practice.

- Compared with C&C3/KW/RA3, this game does have a bit more strategic depth about it. You have to move about on the map and control and defend control nodes, and tiberium spawn spots, as well as grabbing and holding tech structures, like the "home" tech structure which allows quicker build time and respawning. As opposed to those other games were you very well COULD do all those things, they weren't necessary to win.

- 2v2 and higher gameplay felt alright and fairly balanced out. Whilst 1v1 felt awkward and at times difficult, this is because some classes are much better at doing things than others.

- Many units feel redundant, and whilst there may well be 234234 units, you sure as hell won't use half of them.

 

Recommendations

-------------------------------

- Read the tooltips of all units and understand how the counter system works. It is nothing like any previous game, and just because something is a tank, doesn't mean it can kill other tanks.

- Build the appropriate counters to your enemy, when they change units make sure you do as well, delete unneeded units.

- Get to tier 2 ASAP as they hold some of the blast units useful in killing crawlers but more against structures like defences.

- Work as a team, if you don't you'll make things much, much harder on yourselves.

- There were plenty of little graphic bugs, but I'm sure they will be ironed out.

- Tooltips aren't always accurate. Which of course makes picking the right units more difficult. :P

- Maps are rather large, if you can't attack from one direction move around.

 

Should you buy this game?

-------------------------------

- At the moment getting games online can be difficult at times, though I imagine this "may" improve in the future with more people. But to be fair, more and more people were let into the beta, and whilst at times it was very easy to get a game going, this tended to change. So you can imagine what it will be like if this game isn't successful...

- I dislike the idea of 5v5 games, because its tough enough to get enough people you know all online at the same time with timezones, this is no doubt easier for other people, but getting decent 5v5 games going isn't as easy as good old fashioned 1v1 and 2v2 matches.

- I'm not much of a fan of RTT games, so this doesn't really appeal to me. Which is why I find it dull.

- So would I recommend you to buy this game, if you like "traditional" RTS games this ain't it. If you are looking for something a little more "unique and interesting", this isn't it either. Its like WIC, DOW II and C&C all thrown in a blender. Its "fun" for a while, but it loses its appeal soon afterwards...

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×