AchromicWhite

Pretty cool looking... but isn't the really iconic unit of RA1 the heavy tank? tehe Nah, this looks good, though. I'll be interested to see how these sort of units look when they're scaled right down to just tiny units on the screen, in game.

Exactly, Ore Truck. FFA you can just do that. And it's not rule breaking to do it, nor to take revenge by 3v1 someone... because it's FFA.

Yeah, there's no rules in FFA. You just made that up because you felt that it was unfair. FFA has no rules. As I was saying, how would you police it; by getting people to spit their attacking force evenly between other players?.... Then you just drew a line and said that it's the rule, that it's rule breaking if they choose to not attack someone from the start... well what about the other extreme; if you put a lot of your resources into knocking out a particular player (what's the difference between not attacking one player or attacking ONLY one other player?). You're a bit of a cheeser, you must have done this, no? FFA has no rules, because it's impossible to police it. It's not a competitive mode of play.

What's with the funny look... it's FFA, anything goes. How would you make it "fair" and "by the rules"? Have everyone split their armies evenly between all players and only let them use those units against those opponents? People can just attack whom they like, so even if there's no alliance, there's always going to be tactical decisions to choose who you attack.

lol... FFA is a free for all. You can always make shaky alliances. Even without speaking. This is what I've said about FFA for years; it's more political than skill/strategy/tactically based. It can still be fun, but it's not competitive.

I think the depth of the game comes more from it's tactics than it's strategies, to be honest. Strategically, the game mostly leans towards bike/buggy and Med/Grens.

Good work guys! Looks good!

I actually use hotkeys to move my sidebar up and down, so that I can be microing/placing a structure while I get the icons ready to go back to the sidebar (TRUE multitasking xD). But mostly I sit the bars so that multiple important icons are visible.

I mean, they CAN keep it like this, but I'd rather it was customisable. I thought that at first myself, but then, most of the units you make are only a handful, and then the rest are mostly just a few that you scatter in. With the old sidebar (at least the extended one that we have now), you can often fit all the cameos you need to click on in the visible list. So this will always make sure that you HAVE to hit extra buttons to switch between different stuff, even basic units. Pretty ruff on GDI at a point where they're pushing, as you're likely to be going for mass gren + meds (maybe some structure, as well). That's actually a lot harder to manage than the current one. All in all, it's nothing I can't get used to... but still.

I think there's a misunderstanding that this is TD only. I think you'll find they'll use the same layout, but with different colour, for the RA1 sidebar, also. On top of that, they MAY release extra content with more support weapons. IF they move the support weapons off of the sidebar, what would they then fill that space with? My bigger concern is that they're locking stuff away behind extra buttons... when there isn't that much stuff to actually build, especially for TD. The more I think about it, the more I feel like the current sidebar would actually, for the most part, be easier to use (when you're making vehicles, infantry and structures all at the same time. You can SEE them all building, and just click on them. That will no longer be the case without extra button pushes in this build. And god forbid that you have to click the tab buttons, and cannot just use a hotkey to move to them.

I just think that people should stop complaining about being repetitively banned when multiple different mods have banned them, and it's only the same people being banned. The whole point of punishment is to take time to self reflect so that you don't make the same mistake. I've seen those who have been banned/muted etc try to blame the mods instead... obviously that means they'll make the same mistake, as the only way to learn from a mistake is to first admit that you actually DID make a mistake. Complaining about the ban/mute is only convincing yourself that it's unjustified. Take your punishment and learn form it. Then this cycle comes to an end, and everyone benefits.

I find it strange that I don't hear about anyone else being banned on such a frequent basis. Are you sure he knew you were joking, or were you just having fun at someone else's expense?

OK, yeah, they've said that vehicles will be air and naval, also. I can't say I like the idea of the icons changing in size... I also not a big fan of icons off the sidebar

I think part of the issue is just; what should it be under. I'm interested to know where the flyers will be placed (probably vehicles?)

It looks pretty neat... will take some getting used to. Interestingly they didn't mention if they will or will not be doing build queue in the sidebar. A single tab for supers does seem a little strange... but I don't see how else you'd really do it. it also lets them add more if they wanted to create more game modes and stuff. The also haven't mentioned if the icons will stay locked in their own locations, or if they shuffle about when new tech is placed etc. Would be good to know. Given that they seem to be talking about streamlining it for modern RTS, I suspect they'l be ironing that issue out.

Yeah, I agree with the "just because a unit is used less often, doesn't mean that it's not useful". In many cases, a "bad unit" can win you the game. As I stated, I've lost games to units in C tier. However, it's hard to deny that some units fill more roles and are more cost effective/easy to use. This thread was made for entertainment purposes. But it is fun to discuss as well. Funny that you said that 5 tiers was too many... I actually had trouble placing more than one of these, because I wanted more slots, haha.

The more I'd thought about this, the more I'm tempted to have put the Rocket Soldier into D tier. Sure, it gets built often enough... but it's a unit that you only make if you really NEED it (as their isn't an alternate thing that could replace it), and then, unlike all the other C tier units, it can barely move with your army. It's combination of a price, double build time over other basic infantry, coupled with it's terrible move speed and 1/2 hp... It's just a bad unit. At least units like the arty are priced about correctly, but are just hard to use. Rocket soldier is easy enough to use... but it's just bad.

I laughed a little too much at these last posts. Just what I needed before bed time.

This is the FFA Tier list? Interesting. "Ok, the range is not that high. But they are extremely efficient to force opponents to get tanks and lose inf. Also good for getting out harvs quickly. Pence loves them..." You are Pence.

I'd have actually put harvesters on if there was more than 1 type, just to compare them.

Oh, arty have won me games, but I've also won games with flame tanks (and been beaten by these units). Unsure on MLRS. The tech and production barrier would stop it being a full replacement for grens, ever. Better than Chem Warrior, but so is the Stealth Tank. I've never been beaten by any D tier units.

These things are all the rage right now, yeah? This is MY pick for units, though I took some time moving them around, I'm not 100% sure it'd really be my final choice, and people may be able to change my mind on some. Still, I'm pretty happy with it and can describe why each one falls where it does. It's important to note that what might bring one unit into a certain tier may not be the same reason another makes it. The choices are based off of high level play, so not what makes it easy for a newbie to use, but if it can fulfil it's role with less APM, then that's obviously a bonus. S Tier: The bread and butter of both teams, and the units that have no clear counter that simply wipes them out. The Apache is probably the outlier as it's technically a tech unit. However it's so good vs GDI, that a single 1 can often create an overcompensation that can win the game outright, counters it's own counters. The very sight of it completely changing how someone plays... even vs the high amounts of AA Nod has, it's still used. A Tier: Complements to S Tier units, but not quite on par with them. Clearly they're all amazing anti-infantry, but all 3 of these bad boys also have their own roles outside of that use, and are solid at those roles. All require the opponent to change how they play and compensate accordingly, else take terrible terrible damage. B Tier: Units that are attempting to counter S tier units and are doing a reasonably poor job at it. Many of them can be massed and are fine if you just have loads of them... but they have S tier counterparts that are more or less just better versions of the same thing. The Orca is the outlier, great unit against GDI, can open with it or transition into it, probably A or even S vs GDI, but far too poor vs Nod to get a higher ranking... however, it does have some units against Nod, so it makes it up to B. Also Engineers and Chinooks are pretty top notch, as they win plenty of games. C Tier: These units do have uses, but when you use it and get damage done with it, you go "yay!" because it's so rare. If your opponent sees the units, they have clear counters and can be shut down pretty damn easily in most situations. One could make an argument that the artillery is more useful, but with the poor movement AND turn speed coupled with hilariously low HP, it's simply not B tier. D Tier: "Please make me, I want to be in the game." You almost never see them, and if you do it's mostly for the memes. On a more serious note, the most major thing that sets them back is the price of tech. Hopefully this link lets you also have access to making your own Tier list. https://tiermaker.com/create/candc95-units-80479?presentationMode=true

You're a madman, I love it!

You're not wrong, but most of the reason behind that is that whenever I come on, everyone's just trying to play FFA maps, even if it's for 1v1 purposes and I'm just bored to all hell. I want to compete and improve, but the groundwork for it just isn't there. There's one person who's on this thread a few times just trying to bad mouth it, and I've had a couple of others too. I really CBF with names (though, the person on this thread is not too hard to pin point anyway), as I don't want to make it personal. I just want to try and make the best groundwork for competitive C&C95 as I can. It's been that way for years, for those that know me.

Yeah, I think they still take damage from the tree... I'm pretty that even vehicles take damage from the tree, although, only very small amounts. Chem warriors don't die in packs and they do more damage. That's the big advantages. And yes, I'm on your guys side, I want to see it buffed. Probably HP buff. We wanted to move forward faster, but also thought people would want to give feedback. But, like most projects around here, if you want it done, you have to do it yourself. (The irony of that is that the very people that have decided they want this project to fail are doing exactly that, and then blaming the creators of it for that failure. And yet, if we took away their ability to give feedback, would throw the toys from the cot).