Posted by: Twii Light - Sunday, January 14, 2007 8:40:51 PM
I say Tank. Also, no posts saying "I think all the Generals are equal, and are evenly balanced. There is no such concept.

Posted by: Jetril - Sunday, January 14, 2007 11:40:20 PM

Laser General, over reliance on power, not that flash for benefits. If I remember correctly, his advantages include cheaper Avengers, Laser Crusaders, Laser Turrets and advanced power right? Compared to Aurora Alpha and EMF Patriots for Superweapon General and PDL and King Raptor for Air General, Laser's a pretty tame USA General. I'd prefer playing regular, which I wouldn't say for any of the other Generals and their countries (besides Stealth in certain situations where I gnash teeth at lack of tanks).

Posted by: fleetatks - Monday, January 15, 2007 12:35:41 AM
Vchina (Vannilla or regular China) because he lacks anything special compared to the other Van. generals. His only real advantadge, and I've said this before, Is if you want to mix regular tanks with regular firestorm MIG's.

Posted by: Pokey86 - Monday, January 15, 2007 1:59:50 AM
I'd say Nuke gen he just doesn't seem to have any great benefits, however Laser gen is walking a fine line, he really doesn't get alot of good upgrades, shame... So much more ptential, you'd think they'd have at least buffed up the paladin or Avenger (Made it stronger/more effective, not cheaper)

Posted by: AluXes - Monday, January 15, 2007 2:24:49 AM

i dont know what your problem is.. maybe your just noob... well its true that laser gen. doesnt have many good advantages, but he also doesnt miss anything... take for example airforce gen. he doesnt have any good thanks.... but laser gen. has nice thanks, and still has the normal america airpower... aurora bomber, comanches and so on.... its the same with nuke gen.. he has good thanks, nuke bombers and he is nt missing anything, like the tank gen. is...

Posted by: Firion Corodix - Monday, January 15, 2007 4:21:49 AM
i vote laser gen. he has no artillery at all, use a few aurora's/artillery strike/demo gen rebel ambush/or other gen point thing on his powerplants and he wont have any working defenses or working laser crusaders, you can then quickly send your army in and blast his apart, or just do that with your artillery, or both. he can't do anything then unless he has some paladins.

Posted by: Pokey86 - Monday, January 15, 2007 8:42:14 AM
Wouldn't it have been feairer if the Laser Gen has the SW Gens CF reactors, & she had the laer gens ones, that'd have made it a bit more balanced imo

Posted by: Firion Corodix - Monday, January 15, 2007 9:38:16 AM

true, i totally agree with that. and the laser gen shouldn't just have cheaper tanks but also really stronger ones when it comes to their weapons. he specializes in lasers but all he gets with his 'better' lasers is cheaper tanks with a giant backdraw of being dependent on powerplants (how does that even work for the laser crusader, is it just me or does it make no sense?....). they really did a bad job on the laser general, he could have been so much more.

Posted by: CG Apollos - Monday, January 15, 2007 9:46:39 AM

Tank General. No artillery, more expensive infantry and aircraft, and nothing to compensate for the loss of artillery. (The Laser General at least has Aurora Bombers.)[quote=Pokey86] I'd say Nuke gen he just doesn't seem to have any great benefits, [/quote]He doesn't have the greatest benefits, but I like him because he has no big disadvantages or units taken away. That is what makes him good. He is normal China with a few bonuses.

Posted by: Twii Light - Monday, January 15, 2007 12:14:46 PM
Yeah, I'd agree with Laser not being very good, he is definitely my second bet. Although, SWG isn't that bad, I mean, cannons for $2500, and EMP base defenses... Still, I never ever play as her.

Posted by: Jetril - Monday, January 15, 2007 12:37:36 PM

[quote=AluXes] i dont know what your problem is.. maybe your just noob... well its true that laser gen. doesnt have many good advantages, but he also doesnt miss anything... take for example airforce gen. he doesnt have any good thanks.... but laser gen. has nice thanks, and still has the normal america airpower... aurora bomber, comanches and so on.... [/quote] Thanks = Tanks. On topic, Laser General has nice tanks, so does Vanilla USA. Laser General has normal American airpower, so does Vanilla USA. For the cost of tanks (which I personally don't use for America anyway), Air Force General gets Stealth Commanches (don't even bother comparing to the regular, this has such a huge advantage over the regular counterpart), Combat Chinooks (it's like a Paladin Tank with a souped up PDL system and faster firing rate, that's only vulnerable to large groups of anti-air, since the 7 MDs can take out any vehicles while the 1 Pathfinder takes care of infantry) and of course the King Raptor (THE quick strike unit of the game in terms of survivability + damage). Considering the amount of kickarse General Powers that Air Force general gets in comparison to Laser General also makes up for the lack of tanks. The flow between offence and defence is easily managed with Air Force General as all units have high mobility. Seriously, lack of good tanks is NOTHING compared to the advantages AFG gets.

Posted by: BlackAce2020 - Monday, January 15, 2007 4:28:26 PM
i really do not think the airforce gen should even be on the list, but tank is the worst for me, , he just plain...sucks to me

Posted by: AluXes - Monday, January 15, 2007 11:02:55 PM
have you noticed that none of the GLA generals is votet on?? what does that tell ya?

Posted by: Twii Light - Monday, January 15, 2007 11:53:23 PM
That GLA is the best portion? Fancy that.

Posted by: AluXes - Monday, January 15, 2007 11:54:24 PM
at least it tells me: GLA FOR THE WIN!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Jetril - Tuesday, January 16, 2007 2:09:23 AM

[quote=AluXes] have you noticed that none of the GLA generals is votet on?? what does that tell ya? [/quote] It's because the GLA Generals have clear cut different uses compared to each other. Cellar dwellers Tank and Laser Generals both are way too similiar to their plain counterparts or even if a different use/advantage is avaliable, it's not substantial. Wouldn't go as far to say the GLA Generals are the best though :P

Posted by: Twii Light - Tuesday, January 16, 2007 1:57:12 PM
Okay who the hell is voting infantry? You have got to be kidding me. They're the only Chinese portion with a decent defense, and a decent air force. They are NOT the worst in the game.

Posted by: fleetatks - Tuesday, January 16, 2007 4:09:20 PM
People who vote infantry as bad are people who haven't seen their true potential and preffer tanks.

Posted by: xDeliverancex - Tuesday, January 16, 2007 7:45:43 PM
[quote=Fleetatks] People who vote infantry as bad are people who haven't seen their true potential and preffer tanks. [/quote] Another Infantry fan, I see. Infantry Gen is my Most used. But I cant stand the stralth Gen. I just dont like him. No distinct reason why.

Posted by: Twii Light - Tuesday, January 16, 2007 10:12:52 PM
Stealth is my favorite general to use. (I think Infantry is the strongest portion though) I never get sick of using hijackers and jarmen to steal tanks.

Posted by: Pokey86 - Tuesday, January 16, 2007 10:21:42 PM
yeh thats fun ^_^

Posted by: Jetril - Wednesday, January 17, 2007 12:01:35 AM
Odd, couldn't see poll until logged off haha. Surely the people who voted Infantry General thought the question was Worst as in Worst to verse... Otherwise I seriously want to infantry spam them to oblivion... within 10 minutes. He's so imbalanced early game, it's not even funny.

Posted by: ThunderBolt - Wednesday, January 17, 2007 6:42:47 AM
I voted Tank general.

Posted by: Twii Light - Wednesday, January 17, 2007 12:47:41 PM
YOU ARE WISE, YOUNG JIMMI.

Posted by: BlackAce2020 - Wednesday, January 17, 2007 1:27:12 PM
the laser gen would be number 2 for me, the fact that his main advantage is tanks and laser turrets makes him very weak, i really believe that generals could have gone into much more detail and specialization with his units

Posted by: Twii Light - Wednesday, January 17, 2007 2:50:52 PM
Man, I completely 100% agree with Ace for once.

Posted by: BlackAce2020 - Wednesday, January 17, 2007 2:56:39 PM
i think that is what, the third time

Posted by: Comando112 - Thursday, January 18, 2007 2:12:53 AM
Hmmm... Fleetatks is right. I use infantry general because I like star Wars clone wars. using the infantries let me mimic this scene but with red guards not clones. I was versing with my friend and he was using tank. i pwned him by outrunning his base with my large minnigunners. his tanks could only pick off one by one.

Posted by: Jetril - Thursday, January 18, 2007 2:18:59 AM
[quote=Comando112]I was versing with my friend and he was using tank. i pwned him by outrunning his base with my large minnigunners. his tanks could only pick off one by one. [/quote] Correct me if I'm wrong, but Tank General still retains Flame Tank right? If so, he should've beat you to a pulp :P

Posted by: Twii Light - Thursday, January 18, 2007 12:29:14 PM
Flame tanks have bad range though, the minigunners would prolly kill it before it got in range.

Posted by: BlackAce2020 - Thursday, January 18, 2007 3:22:36 PM
gattling tanks, as well and the are vertran, they can take out infnatrry very fast, and he still has migs wo can deploy their flame misses, although on a suicide run in a desperate situatuion

Posted by: spectre - Thursday, January 18, 2007 5:49:09 PM
steatlh, i can never do anything good with him dont get laser wrong...very powerful if u manage ur power inf and tank are sweet only when ur units are heroic? (is that after or before elite?, lol havent played in a long time hehe)...cause they are fast and pwn so quickly

Posted by: Jetril - Thursday, January 18, 2007 9:52:53 PM

[quote=Twii Light] Flame tanks have bad range though, the minigunners would prolly kill it before it got in range. [/quote] Minigunners are great in terms of damage, but not THAT great. Merely two Flame Tanks, with or without Black Napalm upgrade can kill a group of minigunners. If you're lazy and it's a huge mass, lay down the firewall, crispy elite infantry ^^ Reason why I said Flame instead of Gattling is because he mentioned his friend needed to pick his infantry off one by one, which the Gattling does. The initial start up time might also give the minigunners a bit of a chance.

Posted by: Twii Light - Saturday, January 20, 2007 11:42:41 AM
No, flame tanks don't have THAT much health. They wouldn't get many minigunners if they have a lot of them.

Posted by: Jetril - Saturday, January 20, 2007 1:11:44 PM
How many are you talking about? >< It's still equal monetary values here, if you decide to chuck 2 hordes of minigunners at me, well that's a ***** if I've got at most 1 flame tank :P I still think Tank General would have a high chance of defending it off compared to sides such as USA or Stealth early on.

Posted by: fleetatks - Saturday, January 20, 2007 8:08:00 PM
[quote=xDeliverancex]...But I cant stand the stralth Gen. I just dont like him. No distinct reason why. [/quote] Stealth gen is the infantry gen without the infantry (no tanks) advantadge: stealth tactics, good against: people who are scared easily....

Posted by: Twii Light - Saturday, January 20, 2007 10:05:39 PM
Scared? How can you be scared of the Stealth General. Thas silly, downright silly. But I do love using the Stealth General.

Posted by: incia - Sunday, January 21, 2007 1:23:25 AM
[quote=Twii Light] Scared? How can you be scared of the Stealth General. Thas silly, downright silly. But I do love using the Stealth General. [/quote] Sneak attacks are sceary? "Ooh my God, where did my buildings disappear, probably ghosts" :o

Posted by: Misacorp - Sunday, January 21, 2007 1:51:51 AM
I don't think the Laser General is that great. I don't know how to use the Toxin General either, so that's my 2nd vote :)

Posted by: Jetril - Sunday, January 21, 2007 2:33:05 AM

[quote=Incia] [quote=Twii Light] Scared? How can you be scared of the Stealth General. Thas silly, downright silly. But I do love using the Stealth General. [/quote] Sneak attacks are sceary? "Ooh my God, where did my buildings disappear, probably ghosts" :o [/quote] If Sneak Attack = Emergency Tunnel, it's not scary since enemy gets audio of "Sneak attack detected!".. GPS Scramble is even less scary without heavy duty vehicles.. The only thing scary is going "Ehh? EHH? WTF ub3r lag, I can't move my own units!" I spose for a newb, going into where the enemy base should be and finding nothing there since it's all camonetted would be scary too.. Edit: Oh and @misacorp, you use Toxin General exactly like you use normal GLA, unless you usually play with Bomb Trucks and Terrorists. At least for me, what's your trouble in using it?

Posted by: incia - Sunday, January 21, 2007 10:16:24 AM
I was being sarcastic...

Posted by: Twii Light - Sunday, January 21, 2007 11:46:52 AM
Come to think of it, do you guys think it's a let down having the voice actually SAY there's a sneak attack being detected? I mean you don't hear it for Fuel Air Bombs or EMP Bombs or any other General point. (Except GPS)

Posted by: Jetril - Sunday, January 21, 2007 12:51:31 PM

@Incia: Ohh you directed it at Fleetatks, sorry, your quote made me think different. @Twii: It's not really a letdown considering how powerful it can be. Group 8 units under 1, then as soon as you evacuate your first tunnel, you press 1, hit into tunnel, evac straight out. In probably 2 seconds you've got 16 units out, add another second for another batch. You don't really have to bother selecting what to attack for either since chances are the enemy is attempting to destroy the sneak so your units are auto-retaliating anyway or auto-attacking nearby buildings. The voice is probably a minor balancer the way I see it.

Posted by: Twii Light - Sunday, January 21, 2007 5:48:14 PM
Maybe. But I don't think GPS Scrambler should have it.

Posted by: BlackAce2020 - Monday, January 22, 2007 10:50:31 AM
GPS crambler is one of the most valuable assets in the entire. From what you have just decribed, you can have an army of ivisbles death terorsit and destory every thing

Posted by: Twii Light - Monday, January 22, 2007 4:32:58 PM
Or, you could have an invisible army, and your enemy would eventually know it anyway because he'll see you have absolutely no troops. I mean they'll find out sooner or later, at least add some tension.

Posted by: wauppp829 - Monday, January 22, 2007 5:35:43 PM

ok, i only read the first page (i didnt feel like reading any of the others.), but why is it that some people are bagging on the laser and tank gen? i mean the laser gen gets the laser turret can usually pick off scud launcher while its firing at its firing distance. man i love it when it does that.. mainly because i dont have to micro manage my units anymore when artillery fires at me and i have to get my commanches or tanks all the way over there to destroy the scud... and about the tank gen... i mean, its alrite i guess, i sometimes like using the tank gen (only during comp stomps or during skirmish by myself) because i get elite battlemasters at the start and the emperor overlords can do crazy stuff, whether it be defending your base from swarms of scorpions, or destroying a fully developed base. the only downsides to these generals i guess is the fact that the laser crusaders power down when you lose power, the battlemasters have little hit points, the overlords are very "clumsy," and that neither general has artillery (although the laser gen still has the aurora. anyway, in my opinion, i think the infantry general is the least benefitial... i noe the hackers are lot better, and the minigunners can wreak havoc on the air force gen, but other than that, the infantry gen still gets killed by massive armies of quad cannons, pathfinders, or gattling tanks... i mean, the tank hunters still cant take out every vehicle that comes his way... and another thing, before, when i used to actully use the infantry gen, i hated the fact the the advanced bunker never really worked.. sometimes i felt like pwning the AFG during skirmish, but the computer ended up killing my bunkers with stealth fighters and auroras somehow. so i think the advanced bunker just has more capacity, and mines already upgraded (even tanks could come up to me and the tanks would destroy my bunker even though i have like 8 tank hunters and two minigunners in the bunker...) urgh... again, too much typing for me... thx to anyone who was willing to read my really long comment

Posted by: Jetril - Monday, January 22, 2007 8:10:25 PM

[quote=wauppp829]the infantry gen still gets killed by massive armies of quad cannons, pathfinders, or gattling tanks... [/quote] Assault Troop Crawler ftw. Hey, even Assault Helix stands a chance because it's health is ridiculous, you're bound to tank hunter kill the vehicles, helix crippled but regen health with a prop tower. [quote=wauppp829]i mean, the tank hunters still cant take out every vehicle that comes his way... [/quote] Wrong. They can. One Chevron + Horde + Nationalism. Early game, vehicles are also harder to spam out because you have to build another production center, Arms Dealer/War Factory plus you have to wait while it's being built. Infantry General saves the 1000, is able to spam as soon as Barracks is up, that's another 3 Tank Hunters at least. Infantry General is like, the embodiment of the Chinese military, victory by numbers. No way is it the least beneficial, especially it's early game.

Posted by: Twii Light - Monday, January 22, 2007 9:19:27 PM

[quote=wauppp829] ok, i only read the first page (i didnt feel like reading any of the others.), but why is it that some people are bagging on the laser and tank gen? i mean the laser gen gets the laser turret can usually pick off scud launcher while its firing at its firing distance. man i love it when it does that.. mainly because i dont have to micro manage my units anymore when artillery fires at me and i have to get my commanches or tanks all the way over there to destroy the scud... and about the tank gen... i mean, its alrite i guess, i sometimes like using the tank gen (only during comp stomps or during skirmish by myself) because i get elite battlemasters at the start and the emperor overlords can do crazy stuff, whether it be defending your base from swarms of scorpions, or destroying a fully developed base. the only downsides to these generals i guess is the fact that the laser crusaders power down when you lose power, the battlemasters have little hit points, the overlords are very "clumsy," and that neither general has artillery (although the laser gen still has the aurora. [/quote] What's wrong with Tank General: * Darer Infantry * Darer Hackers * Darer Aircraft * No Artillery When tanks are your only economical option, it's hard to assault some generals, and some bases. Espiecally Chinese and SWG Factions. Nuke, China, and Infantry are just better for mixed operations, and have a better income. What's wrong with Laser General: * That there is a lot of power * Laser Crusader, and a Laser Patriot... That's it. Yehp, that's it. I prefer Airforce and Super Weapons. [quote]anyway, in my opinion, i think the infantry general is the least benefitial... i noe the hackers are lot better, and the minigunners can wreak havoc on the air force gen, but other than that, the infantry gen still gets killed by massive armies of quad cannons, pathfinders, or gattling tanks... i mean, the tank hunters still cant take out every vehicle that comes his way... and another thing, before, when i used to actully use the infantry gen, i hated the fact the the advanced bunker never really worked.. sometimes i felt like pwning the AFG during skirmish, but the computer ended up killing my bunkers with stealth fighters and auroras somehow. so i think the advanced bunker just has more capacity, and mines already upgraded (even tanks could come up to me and the tanks would destroy my bunker even though i have like 8 tank hunters and two minigunners in the bunker...) [/quote] Infantry is probably the best Chinese portion. Why? Fortified Bunker. Nuff' said. Best defense in the game, and only a meer 500. You can repel absolutely anything with these things.

Posted by: Jetril - Monday, January 22, 2007 9:44:11 PM
Darer = Dearer Also, he mentioned his reasoning for hating Fortified Bunkers. I totally agree with you on them repelling anything, but they need to be in groups or supported since his given situations can defeat the bunker. Plus the actual bonus units and upgrades Inf gets are unstoppable enough.

Posted by: Twii Light - Monday, January 22, 2007 9:47:39 PM
How can the AFG gen destroy fortified bunkers? If they're garrisoned with an even mix of troops, they should make short work of aircraft.

Posted by: Jetril - Monday, January 22, 2007 11:56:51 PM
One Bunker, like any other singular structure, will be destroyed by Auroras. The point is to have other bunkers within range to annihilate the aurora as it finishes its attack run, making it much too costly to suicide $2000 planes against a bunker. Not sure about the stealth fighter example but I spose the same thing.

Posted by: Twii Light - Tuesday, January 23, 2007 11:36:17 AM
Yeah, one bunker, but not one fortified bunker, that can take like three.

Posted by: BlackAce2020 - Tuesday, January 23, 2007 12:28:06 PM
General abilitie, send is a specter to distract the fire, then lauchs aurora/stealth fighter/raptor attacks to destory the defensive line, then swarm in with comaches

Posted by: Jetril - Tuesday, January 23, 2007 12:35:05 PM
The problem is being able to get those General Abilities when the only thing you'll be killing is low experience giving infantry, plus the early game that Infantry will dominate all over Air General in most situations.

Posted by: Twii Light - Tuesday, January 23, 2007 2:04:59 PM
Ace, spectres last about 3 seconds in a infantry general base. Every unit is anti air.

Posted by: BlackAce2020 - Tuesday, January 23, 2007 2:46:24 PM
yueah, but that three seconds can be detrimental, take out all dozers and the cc in that amout of tiem

Posted by: Twii Light - Tuesday, January 23, 2007 5:34:50 PM
And then build more in 4 seconds.

Posted by: BlackAce2020 - Wednesday, January 24, 2007 11:42:20 AM
told you. no dozers, no cc, what ever you have left, one fuel airbomb, or a-10 strike to take out your barakc, and then for your pesky infnatry, send over two combat chinooks fully loaded with snipers, total onwnation of the infantry gen

Posted by: Twii Light - Wednesday, January 24, 2007 12:00:00 PM
Well if they had a A10 strike, a fuel air bomb, who can't say the infantry general doesn't have paratroopers or artillery barrage? And another thing, snipers can't get infantry in Fortified bunkers. And last time I checked the fuel air bomb doesn't even fully destroy them, and it hardly ever gets through anyway.

Posted by: BlackAce2020 - Wednesday, January 24, 2007 3:13:06 PM

auroras take out the buinker, and soon after, combat chiook move only close enough to get snipers in range, then stealth fighters take out your gattling cannons, then a few king raps to take out your troop crawlers, yes one rap can take out a troop crawler. then assuming you have artillery strike you will not have it anymore, becuase remeber, i destroyed your cc and all of your dozers, so you have noting left to build. So once bunker are gone, you can't replace them, once barrakck are destroyed, no more infnatry. That is why i always mass up auroras wuik and take out the cc, and then use stealth fighters to take out the dozers.

Posted by: Twii Light - Wednesday, January 24, 2007 3:36:14 PM
Or: Gattling cannons take out auroras, losing you at least $6000 if you're using a decent ammount. Then leaving the bunkers unharmed, taking out the combat chinooks, and then the bunkers would continue to take down your king raptors. We could go on and on, you can't just give examples of situations like that, because every situation usually has a way to counteract it.

Posted by: BlackAce2020 - Wednesday, January 24, 2007 4:21:00 PM
ogmg AUrora dropg their pay load before the gattling cannon can ge ta good shot, i wold you this would be timed perfectly so that once biunkers are destroyed my chinnoks kill all the innfnatyr and the stealth fighter are right their to take out your pesky gattling cannons

Posted by: Twii Light - Wednesday, January 24, 2007 4:58:29 PM
You'd have to have quite a lot of auroras because it takes like 3 to destroy one fortified bunker.

Posted by: Jetril - Wednesday, January 24, 2007 5:10:03 PM

Twii used Gattling CannonS, plural. BlackAce used THE gattling cannon, singular. Note that you guys aren't even using the same situation. Of course the Aurora will defeat a single cannon by itself since by the time Aurora loses invulnerability, the cannon is destroyed. 5 Cannons together though, even if you micro managed two Auroras per Cannon, the 3 loose Gattlings will still destroy you. This takes into account cost comparison where 4 Auroras at $1600 each is $6400, which gives 5 $1200 Gattling Cannons. Or, because 8 Elite Minigunners totally rocks my socks off, replace 2 of the Gattling Cannons with 1 Assault Troop Crawler, same cost of $2400. If you want to talk about Fortified Bunkers + 10 minigunners, that's $4200 if anyone wants to play around with it. Oh and if you talk about Stealth Fighter, take into account extra costs that Infantry General also gets.

Posted by: Twii Light - Wednesday, January 24, 2007 5:41:11 PM
I like women

Posted by: Pokey86 - Wednesday, January 24, 2007 9:46:12 PM

[quote=BlackAce2020] auroras take out the buinker, and soon after, combat chiook move only close enough to get snipers in range, then stealth fighters take out your gattling cannons, then a few king raps to take out your troop crawlers, yes one rap can take out a troop crawler. then assuming you have artillery strike you will not have it anymore, becuase remeber, i destroyed your cc and all of your dozers, so you have noting left to build. So once bunker are gone, you can't replace them, once barrakck are destroyed, no more infnatry. That is why i always mass up auroras wuik and take out the cc, and then use stealth fighters to take out the dozers. [/quote] LOL then my 60 nuclear missiles that i built earlier makes short work of your airfields lol @ the "Here's one i made earlier" thing lol

Posted by: BlackAce2020 - Thursday, January 25, 2007 1:38:19 PM
If you have 60 nuclear missle, i send over two auroras to take out one powerplant, and then you are finsihed, then kep senidng in wave after wacve, knocking out your power, King Raps destroy you command center, stealth fighters take out your dozers, and aurora pound your power, then king rapos go after priority targets such as supply centers, and war factories

Posted by: Twii Light - Thursday, January 25, 2007 4:55:41 PM
... Or he could just put another power plant on over charge.

Posted by: BlackAce2020 - Thursday, January 25, 2007 5:57:05 PM
one powerplant on overcharge cannot replace one entire powerplant. And i told you, i would continuosly sned in auroras, say i could have at least 20 auroras if he has 60 nukes maybe 80 king raps and about 20 stealth fighters

Posted by: Twii Light - Thursday, January 25, 2007 7:42:09 PM
... Or he could put five power plants on over charge.

Posted by: incia - Friday, January 26, 2007 12:52:15 AM
... Or he could construct more Power Plants while the King Raptors and Auroras reload.

Posted by: Twii Light - Friday, January 26, 2007 11:57:45 AM
Or better yet BOTH OMG WARGASM

Posted by: desirous - Sunday, January 28, 2007 6:03:08 PM
What's up with this fortified bunker argument? Why bother with the bunkers themselves - just clear them out with stealth fighters. They're cheaper than Auroras (though the upgrade costs $1,500) and are more likely to survive.

Posted by: fleetatks - Monday, January 29, 2007 4:30:28 AM
Bunker busters don't work against tunnels or chinese bunkers since the patch.

Posted by: Jetril - Monday, January 29, 2007 2:16:31 PM
That's pretty bad nerf, Stealth Fighters in the first place weren't worth the one gen point compared to some other powers and for Air Gen without the gen point, you'd opt for King Raptors in most scenarios... That's how I play USA anyway.

Posted by: Nikdude - Thursday, February 22, 2007 5:30:15 PM
is aw inf general i mean ya they are good somtimes but in my opion SUCKY

Posted by: Apsis - Sunday, February 25, 2007 12:33:38 PM

So it is about Infantry VS Airforce... i prefer airorce althow infantry has Incredible defence... you are tolkin abot 60 nuklears... hah well i'd play Airfoce, use auroras as cmicdze to take down the first nuklear and propaganda centre and make sure you won't have propaganda in fulture :) the attack would be 6 HmmVees with TomMissle full ov pathfinders and 6 tomahowks... how will infantry stop that? ofcourse 3-4 HmmVees should be there too, but full of missle launchers couse of the helix and mig's! Ones defence is down stealth comachees come right away!

Posted by: Twii Light - Saturday, March 3, 2007 10:32:10 PM

I think air force is a bad general to use. He has many enemies who are quite keen on keeping those planes down. I find that he's better against GLA generals, as opposed to China and USA Laser & SWG. If you go up against any china general with him (to avoid possible conflict, lets say that both players have some what equal skill) I think; that if all luck is out of the way, The Chinese general would definitely have the advantage. Especially if the Chinese general is the infantry division. I just think he has a very good arsenal for combating air (and various other units). I can honestly say that Infantry is the best general in the game.

Posted by: timewarp - Monday, March 5, 2007 12:25:16 PM
The laser general requires completely different strategies than other generals. You cannot rush with the laser general. It's all about turtling, and this really is the only general you can do that with.

Posted by: incia - Monday, March 5, 2007 1:13:25 PM
[quote=timewarp] The laser general requires completely different strategies than other generals. You cannot rush with the laser general. It's all about turtling, and this really is the only general you can do that with. [/quote] Except SW General.

Posted by: timewarp - Monday, March 5, 2007 1:27:38 PM
[quote=Incia] [quote=timewarp] The laser general requires completely different strategies than other generals. You cannot rush with the laser general. It's all about turtling, and this really is the only general you can do that with. [/quote] Except SW General. [/quote] What do you mean?

Posted by: incia - Monday, March 5, 2007 1:46:08 PM
[quote=timewarp] [quote=Incia] [quote=timewarp] The laser general requires completely different strategies than other generals. You cannot rush with the laser general. It's all about turtling, and this really is the only general you can do that with. [/quote] Except SW General. [/quote] What do you mean? [/quote] I mean SW General is the ultimate turtling general.

Posted by: timewarp - Monday, March 5, 2007 2:07:37 PM

[quote=Incia] [quote=timewarp] [quote=Incia] [quote=timewarp] The laser general requires completely different strategies than other generals. You cannot rush with the laser general. It's all about turtling, and this really is the only general you can do that with. [/quote] Except SW General. [/quote] What do you mean? [/quote] I mean SW General is the ultimate turtling general. [/quote] Not against infantry general. EMP turrets are really ineffective against infantry. And if the other player is smart, they would know that USA can't get ranger without first killing some enemy troops. So an infantry rush against EMP gen would work.

Posted by: incia - Monday, March 5, 2007 2:51:42 PM
Ranger? they are USA's first normal infantries, everyone can buy Rangers from the first start. And some Flashbangs or Humvee's full of Rangers would work. But yeah... Infantry General is the best general versus SW General. But every other general are good versus the lame Laser General.

Posted by: timewarp - Monday, March 5, 2007 3:44:27 PM

[quote=Incia] Ranger? they are USA's first normal infantries, everyone can buy Rangers from the first start. And some Flashbangs or Humvee's full of Rangers would work. But yeah... Infantry General is the best general versus SW General. But every other general are good versus the lame Laser General. [/quote] You have that backwards. Lasers are powerful against everything. They do higher damage than shells or missiles, they cannot be shot down, or stopped by PDLs, they are instant, and they often finish their salvo by shooting at a much greater distance than what should be their maximum. They are powerful against infantry, vehicles, and aircraft, and the only thing that can safely hit them are china's artillery, or the rocket buggy, (and of course an Aurora, but those can safely hit [i]anything[/i]) which can easily be destroyed by just about any unit behind the turret. They can shoot down SCUDs, and tomahawks. The laser turret is basically amazing.

Posted by: Jetril - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 1:00:19 AM

[quote=timewarp] [quote=Incia] Ranger? they are USA's first normal infantries, everyone can buy Rangers from the first start. And some Flashbangs or Humvee's full of Rangers would work. But yeah... Infantry General is the best general versus SW General. But every other general are good versus the lame Laser General. [/quote] You have that backwards. Lasers are powerful against everything. They do higher damage than shells or missiles, they cannot be shot down, or stopped by PDLs, they are instant, and they often finish their salvo by shooting at a much greater distance than what should be their maximum. They are powerful against infantry, vehicles, and aircraft, and the only thing that can safely hit them are china's artillery, or the rocket buggy, (and of course an Aurora, but those can safely hit [i]anything[/i]) which can easily be destroyed by just about any unit behind the turret. They can shoot down SCUDs, and tomahawks. The laser turret is basically amazing. [/quote] Which of those benefits effect the Laser Crusader?

Posted by: incia - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 5:00:58 AM
Lasers are actually bad versus infantry, so one Rebel Ambush or something could be enough to destroy your Power plants. Then all your Laser Crusaders and Laser turrets become useless. Or if you get rushed by hundreds of Minigunners from the Infantry General, then Laser General can't do anything.

Posted by: timewarp - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 9:26:25 AM

[quote=Incia] Lasers are actually bad versus infantry, so one Rebel Ambush or something could be enough to destroy your Power plants. Then all your Laser Crusaders and Laser turrets become useless. Or if you get rushed by hundreds of Minigunners from the Infantry General, then Laser General can't do anything. [/quote] Only the lasers on laser crusaders. Laser turrets are very potent against infantry.

Posted by: outlaw2747 - Monday, March 19, 2007 4:45:11 PM
I wouldn't say the laser general is the worst. A good rush can murder anyone but late in the game those laser turrets become quite nasty if set up right. Against minugunners, if you have them supplemented by pathfinders...well there goes the neighborhood.

Posted by: Pokey86 - Monday, March 19, 2007 11:41:51 PM
Tank Gen is the worst, no long range makes him practically useless late game, & i do mean useless, he also has way to many weaknesses & doesn't bost the economy & early game advantage of the nuke or infantry gen counterparts

Posted by: Twii Light - Monday, March 19, 2007 11:56:51 PM
^ Truth.

Posted by: Darus - Wednesday, March 28, 2007 9:47:38 PM
no, i think laser gen is the weakest. laser crusaders are pathetic

Posted by: incia - Thursday, March 29, 2007 7:26:58 AM
[quote=Darus] no, i think laser gen is the weakest. laser crusaders are pathetic [/quote] Finally someone who thinks like I do, thank you.