X3M

Why is he naked? Or half naked if he wears trousers.

Aaaaawwww, yes!!! Achron Yeah, the chaos is what eventually kills the mind of every player. Thus the one with the best overview of the time line wins eventually. With enough resources, you can make the first kill too. However, it is a good thing there is a limit in how far back you can go. Or else, you could make a proxy and send in an army to kill the beginning. Any way, the multiple dimensions, they use this concept for one of the star trek chess games. Although, I would say, you made the game 3D instead of 2D. How about the minecraft principle. Where new terrain generates when you explore. One player could start moving away to a ridiculous distance. But still has to move that far. And exploring needs a lot of clicks of the mouse though. Like how aircraft in TS explores terrain. Higher tier units would contain fast units, like the bike. And thus useful since they are good in hit n run tactics on the spread world.

True. The solution to this would be having the new balance a new of the creator. And calling it a mod. Example: "Zjorz Balance Mod" All infantry self heal, agreed. But the medic may stay. Yet, they should make the medic cheaper and/or faster in his job. The kennel is indeed useless. But dogs are to expensive too, 100 each I think. Them dying instantly from bullets is what makes them so useless. And they only can chew on infantry. The redundant stuff, I would keep them in. But rebalancing them. This in combination with the resource management of course. And final, the squishing, is still OP. In C&C3 you see a stacked group of infantry. Yet the tank has problems running them over. They only get 1 soldier at a time. So you see the tank humping the group of infantry. (which is funny to watch ) They need to get this in RA too. Or change the costs of tanks accordingly. If shooting an infantry is worth 50 (weapon rifle infantry). Then the tanks do this about 4? times faster on 1 and they do 5 at the same time. Thus 20 x 50 is 1000. Yes, crushing infantry is worth that much when it is done at the same range as the rifle. However, you need to get closer for squishing. Thus it would be less, perhaps around 750 or so. I don't know the addition % of costs for every range. A light tank would be about 1450. An heavy tank would be about 1700. Simply due to the fact of crushing. Squishing is not an ability, but a weapon. With that in mind, every new RTS can be balanced much more easily. (I can't prove, but some one did get my memo )

Every new idea sounds stupid to other people. Here is my "stupid" idea What about a 4 dimensional game? Where units can move in 8 directions instead of just 6. We have, up (air), down (underground), left, right, forward, backwards, "deeper", "upper". The 4th dimension could be indicated with a slightly different colour scheme. For simplicity, only 3, just like air, ground, subground. Weapons can go from one dimension to another. Which all count as -1 on range. So an AA turret has -1, but an AA turret fighting from the basic dimension to air in a deep dimension would be -2. When selecting a unit in an "upper" dimension, the map to will colour to what that unit can move through. The unit will automatically change dimensions when moving. Thus we could have 4 dimensional tunneling.

A good game has no spam feasts. Thus removing the bonus on Russia is included in the lowering resource management. Let's say that that is a package deal when balancing the game. OR changing the reduction in 5% instead of 10%. Please keep in mind that with normal resource managment (still plenty to keep production). Also means, Russia can continue 10% longer at this current game. While others simply "stop" production.

Unless you use a road. Mission 8 with GDI, where you have only barracks for infantry production. But all other units need repairs. First things first, getting the crate in the village. Thus moving in with an APC over the road. 4 soldiers are just standing there. The crushing goes humouristic fast .

GDI responded with that the funding cut was a tactic to get exponentially more funding. Thus they also could fund the ORCA (and Mammoth). "This is all, what it is about".

C&C3 has great balance. (Ignore the complainers that say that Scrin is OP, since they aren't)

The rifle infantry has only 3 range. The Ranger has 6 sight range, which is very useless to have. It is funny how all 3 units: rifle infantry, ranger and APC have the exact same weapon. 15 (SA) and ROF of 20. Now, the question that remains is (sort of same question), how much damage percent does every weapon?

Let's assume that the opponent has found a way to make infantry crush practically impossible. (Walls) Overall, the range will do more damage when used as hit and run unit. The apc is meant to go into hostility. In this case, let's value how both will do against infantry. Spending the same amount of money, gives the ranger +33% more damage. While total health becomes the same. Now, the snipe factor is a little higher for the ranger. Thus the overall damage will drop faster during combat. (Where rangers die before apc die?) You need to know the armour effects, to know if the apc is truly an better option. How does the armor work on rifle infantry? How does the armor work on grenadiers? How does the armor work on bazooka men?

AVG is one of the worst if you ask me. Just like Norton.

Good point. Perhaps mentioning that airstrike is disabled due to the problems it causes would be a valid hint instead though?

Medics. Only on low money maps, are they useful. And you need to sim city your base. For walling them in, you need structures or tanks. Using rifle infantry is not really an option, use bazooka men instead if you decide on using medics. Although, if you can place a barracks in front of your base. Wall this in with Pill boxes and/or turrets. And then spam 2 medics with 8 bazooka. They cannot be over run. And 4 bazooka > 1 turret. 4 bazooka also > 1 AA gun. Remember that they cannot run away from V2 and from Yaks. But then again, having 5 bazooka is even better. Replacement when needed is cheaper, since V2 is an instant kill for bazooka and medics! Any way, great defence when dealing with a silly AI.

Allied: Field medic: useless in a tank centered game Find a way to properly wall in your infantry, think again. But is way to expensive for a proper function. I would say, costs 400, not 800. Ranger: a crappy version of the apc without transport functionality Agreed, once again, great fodder if costs are less, 400 again? You forgot to mention, this one doesn't crush infantry. However, it is a great scout in the first minutes of the game. It outruns all other units. Camo pillbox: more expensive pillbox with the same weapon. Waste of money No, has more health. But 200 more costs is indeed a bit to much. The only function is raping infantry. In a tank based game... Sandbags: crap version of walls that have little use yet are better Agreed, and the worst part is, they get run over too! Fake structures: waste of time to build. Nobody cared about a fake radar or naval yard No, I like faking . They have a decent ammount of health for occupying an opponent. Soviet: Barbed wire: same as sandbag Agreed. Kennel: never seen anybody build this or a dog, EVER Agreed. Iron curtain: way to expensive for what it does. Agreed. But it is a fun weapon Yak: does way to little damage vs buildings. Mig is superior and costs just a little more Yak is the anti infantry version. Basicly, useless if you ask me. Soviet mine layer: nobody bothers with anti inf mines since inf is easy to kill Agreed Let me know what you think I think pineapples do good in a salad.

The answer to that. YES!!! No seriously, yes is the answer to that question .

The game play offering, is a good argument indeed. Why players like that map(?). You got a good point there. I think there are more maps that offer this game play. You simply have to find them. Only way to find them is test other maps out. I have played the map too often by now to be counted in the every one corner.

I do get the point though. It isn't like I think every one is scared of changing. Just a few. ( I think it is 50% at this point since people keep leaving when I host, demanding to change the rules and map etc.) I get bored of a map after playing it just once. Then I simply want to play another map. Every game has "THE" map. However, one should realize that playing the same map over and over again. Even though it is comforting that you win >50% on that map. It doesn't mean you are better then 50% of the players. No, for proving yourself that you are better then 50% of the players, you need to play other maps too. 2 pro's should try another map and play on that map. How about this game gets the option; choose random map? It might prove some awesome new stories for the players. Since they don't know where to scout.

You might want to add the production speed limit to the Atreides High Tech. Having 2 or 3 does not increase the air strike. Only carryall production.

Did you just get pissed at me for that comment?

I think players are to scared to play other maps. It isnt a matter of imbalance?

I would not try a lion either.

Doesn't have to be gay though

It is a macro thing. When playing micro, it indeed doesnt work well for the game.

You have that principle in planetary annihilation.

Tiberian sun has subterrain units, which is very innovative. By the way, talking about badass games; the really cool looking games? Or games that are very chaotic? Really cool looking game: Where one explains the game a bit http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiufP40Efxo And another plays with the most freeky monster http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eva_ijSpuUY A chaotic game would be: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EX461S5Cbqk Ok, I don't even know any more what is going on in this next one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sak1HLBJeig