Whats wrong with open ra tiberium dawn?

[chem]

I havnt played it much yet but they managed to get the feel of the old game and it looks very good graphics wise has heaps of features big maps,. What are the positives and negatives of the game?

 

Edited October 25, 2018 by chem

[Hetzer]

From all I've seen it has really good A.I. (bots) compared to the original. Good for training.

Unfortunately there's little to no multiplayer activity. I guess that the game balance is somehow messed-up.

One more reason to keep the old-school C&C alive. If we can only do something about that 90's A.I./pathfinding...

 

[AchromicWhite]

It's a very different game, buggies and bikes are much weaker, while light tanks and stealth tanks are much stronger. etc
AGT fires anti armour missiles.

Stuff like that.

[X3M]

The RPS effect is very different in this game.

Of course they put in good idea's. Like having a hospital auto generates your infantry. The resource management is like that of C&C3, but takes away the feel. Long walls can be build. etc. etc.

But there are many aspects that I don't like about the game. I also, only played against AI. So I don't know if the RPS effects are truly busted or not. Perhaps just different, which would require us calling ourselves newbs for a while if we where to play it online.

[Hetzer]

One more thing, I'd say that the really long-range of the artillery in OpenRA makes it really annoying but also more effective than in the original.

Also the fact the Helicopters stay/reload by themselves in the air/can be put on guard mode is also a huge change from the original.

You could build almost impenetrable defenses by using a combination of defensive structures/artillery and air cover on guard mode. In single player games I could easily setup such a defence, go have lunch and find my base untouched when I got back. ?

[X3M]

The scaling of Range is indeed weird, I observed that too. Perhaps it is because certain effects where not included in the designs. Not only that, but ranking makes units godlike in their own perspective. This should be toned down as well.

[AchromicWhite]

Yeah, artillery units in TD are mostly not that good. Either because they're just kinda buggy (arty) or too higher tech (MLRS). The SSM is the one that stands out, for sure. But tanks are so damn good that you need some serious anti armour to be able to really make use of SSM.

Rocket infantry, though they have the right weapon and right armour type to defeat tanks, mostly don't REALLY do it, and are more of a support unit.

[X3M]

2 hours ago, AchromicWhite said:

Yeah, artillery units in TD are mostly not that good. Either because they're just kinda buggy (arty) or too higher tech (MLRS). The SSM is the one that stands out, for sure. But tanks are so damn good that you need some serious anti armour to be able to really make use of SSM.

Rocket infantry, though they have the right weapon and right armour type to defeat tanks, mostly don't REALLY do it, and are more of a support unit.

There is a math reason for that. So yes, they are indeed only useful as support unit. Especially against non combat objects. But if you can get that far, you might as well win the normal combat first before targeting non combat objects.

[AchromicWhite]

They still have their places. Arty is pretty dang useful vs light vehicles... but you need a good wall of units before they becomes useful.
Yeah, most structures are light/wood, and die super fast to HE/Flame.