it would be nice to not have shroud for once like in RA2 and I would like he option but I supose it is effort for them...

It was funny in RA2 when you had short game on and the ai commits suicide because you have destroyed his main structures.

Edited by user Thursday, June 7, 2007 12:29:49 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

dont think those last infantry units would do any difference in the game after all...

And what if you have 30 predator tanks, but your MCV and warfactory is dead, so you cant build any units, and the enemy has one last venom flying around the map... then you would loose just because he didnt die when you destroyed his whole base...

I don't think that having the victorious player go on a wild goose chase for that last Stealth Tank would be very fun. I remember having to do the same thing in RA2, searching the seas for submarines, which could take a while if the player kept moving them away from your naval units.

Unfortunately without Apocs presence the official forumses are swarming with noobies and hatred. Posting this there right now would be kind of wasted time :/

I have been on the forumses 24/7, the page is open all the time. Especially during the nights there are NO moderators whatsoever... spam threads everywhere.

And the Moderators only lock/delete some topics, they don't answer to your questions, so you would get zero feedback from the Devs.

you would think that they would have people in different time zones looking after the forums to stop this kind of thing

Yeah, that retreat idea is a good one, but it would be a bit unsubstantial if it was so simple. A retreat denotes some sort of flight from the battle, not a last-ditch effort to win the battle. With some more, in themselves simple, features a "retreat" feature could work very well. For example, there should perhaps be some way for units to leave the map perhaps in evac vehicles or simply crossing the map border. With this addition (which would complicate much of the rest of the gameplay extensively and in all likelihood necessitate further features) a last-ditch attempt would be legitimized in the form of either part of your army covering the rest of the units' retreat or there not being any way to retreat (realized only after the retreat order was given, not unlikely) and throwing everything at the enemy. This would make endgames more open, which nearly always makes RTS games more interesting since endgames are more often than not Cold Wars with sudden apocalyptic results, and would allow for a more flexible battle result and debrief.

About the "Short Game" feature, the RA2 implementation of "Long Games", as others here mentioned, is not so good and keeping the Short Game flag enabled by default (perhaps even locked as such) is reasonable. On the other hand, a more appropriate, and preferably more abstract, implementation would be appreciated.

With RTS games, the more options the better, the ultimate RTS game would be one where nothing is constant and no game options are concrete. A game where the player can customize units, research options, and so on is in the right direction. The game that goes the furthest towards this form of ideal RTS games that I know of is World War III: Black Gold where you can customize units to some degree (decide what sort of weaponry, sensors, air filters, etc. a vehicle can have for example).

The way things have been going with CnC, I'm sure their games will continue to not dissapoint gamers and in most cases far surpass expectations and come forth with unexpected twists to the series. They have in the past and they will again. For all we know they might hop onto MMORPG bandwagon with a CnC based MMORPG, I doubt they will, but I also doubt people were expecting CnC Renegade.

My bottom line about the conditions for winning an RTS game: it should be as open and realistic as reasonably possible. One stealth tank can't take out a full enemy base, but 50 Mammoth tanks very well might. I'm sure RTS game devs will come up with a very satisfactory solution.

No worries.

Actually glad you bumped this... because if you've seen the big Scrin mirror match by now you will realize that the losing team have a huge army in the enemies base, while the almost dead player uses the MM/MS tactic. So the Mothership blows up the enemies whole base and he wins.
But the losing player had a HUGE army in the enemies base, and the only units the other player had left was 1 Mastermind and 1 Mothership.
So if you wouldn't win directly when your base blows up, the other player in this game would have won for sure. But instead his huge Tripod/Seeker army magically died when his base were blown up.