Almighty Global Conquest poll!

[JahSpoR 0]

The time has come to judge!

.... now JUDGE!

 

what's with New Zealand not being at the map? it's quite large you know.

[Luk3us 63]

lol... Its to stop crazy people from bombing us.

 

 

My main problem with it was it was to "open", they need terrain and rivers and such that would hinder units moving along. Its too open and like and the cities are meaningless. Having actual terrorities and having bases borders actually mean something would have been better.

 

Though when you compare this to something like, Rome Total war or any of the other games in that series this doesn't even come close, and maybe that is why I dislike it so much, eh its a good idea, but wasn't very well implement imo.

Edited April 2, 2008 by Luk3us

[JahSpoR 0]

LUL, don't pick "im a retard" retards!

 

I see what you mean. I was actually expecting something like the map in the first C&C where you had to take it step by step.

It's kinda sucky it costs 1000 to move wherever you have a city or a harbour in one turn. Theres too much going on at the same time.

And the idea of circle territories is kinda lame when two circles are inside eachother.

 

 

Im kinda sad, they where so "LOOK AT THIS UBER SHIZ WE GOT FOR YA" ,. and then they probably got some higher priorities from then on, and made it in a hurry.

[Jason 0]

I'm a 360 player, ask me in June.

[Alphabear 11]

I dont mind it, seems interesting enough

 

[Inferno 22]

It's lame. There are no borders, countries, no real territories to conquer. The battles are too much alike and therefore boring. It's like.... playing the same skirmish at the same map, against the same CPU with the same army. It's nice that you can assemble your own army (although not well balanced, deployment cost ingame =/= GC mode deployment cost), but it's just more of the same, and those influence areas are just weird.

[Luk3us 63]

There is a bug when using epic units. For example, if you fully garrison out a Marv and then it lives, it retains its veterancy, and the units inside it. Next time you use it, you can garrison another 4 people in it, and still have the previously 4 in too. You can keep doing this potentially. lol... 8 engineers and 8 Zone Raiders? Pwned.

[Jason 0]

Still a 360 player.

[Doctor Destiny 41]

Still a 360 player.

WE KNOW! NOBODY CARES! ¬_¬

[Inferno 22]

There is a bug when using epic units. For example, if you fully garrison out a Marv and then it lives, it retains its veterancy, and the units inside it. Next time you use it, you can garrison another 4 people in it, and still have the previously 4 in too. You can keep doing this potentially. lol... 8 engineers and 8 Zone Raiders? Pwned.

Lol, really?

[JahSpoR 0]

Lol, really?

 

no!! that's why he wrote it

[Gben 20]

I like Luk3us's comments about the terrain etc, but on the world scale a river really doesn't matter - especially when you have airlift abilities. But maybe that just affects the price or requires upgrades... We ZOCOM, and MARV strike forces, maybe you just need to build the modern version of the CAVALRY (ie airborne units).

 

I think it's fairly well established that cities/countries don't exist in the future in the same way that we understand them now, but I would have like to have seen more emphasis on the blue/yellow/red zones. Even if it was along the line lines of the failed C&C3 maps where each zone had different advantages - or so that you had a 'home side' advantages. etc

 

I only played one game against an easy ai, and the lack of territories threw me... as an avid RISK player. But I do like the concept, it's an amusing and interesting addition to the universe. And it's something that I hope could be developed and evolved into a better game.

 

I give it the thumbs up... with the hope that either the devs or the community can keep improving it. (I would pay for a turn-based C&C game... it'd just have to be better than this!) One of the improvements would have to be MP! Just imagine a MMO version where each base was an individual player, and all battles were resolved in RT.

 

By the way I think this is a PC exclusive feature, and I think the you should think of the game as "auto-resolve" by default, and "real-time" as an option.

[Luk3us 63]

Real time is far better, cause that way you never lose even when up against stupidly large numbers. Its so fun, by the time you have your refinery up they're attacking with dozens of units.

[Gben 20]

Sure in real time, I once p'wnd a nod easy ai redeemer with 4 half-powered zone troopers... to steal an unlikely win. But I was just referring to the inferno's comment about the monotony of some skirmishes.

 

(it was funny - he used his rage generator then using his guerilla ai, ran away around the mountain to come at the back and killed my 2 firebats which were resting on the support pad. this was my sole building. But due to the time it took to go around the to the back of the base, the rage generator had worn off, and I got control of my units. I jetpacked one ZT to his rear, and turned around to attack that single trooper, while the other three happilly fired at his back for a few minutes until he died and so I snuck a lucky win out of it all!)

 

I'll have to try your marv bug!!!