Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

Tetrium wrote:

In TA, everything has it's use...or at least that was their intent. And it's sorta true, even fleas are very handy as cannon fodder or distracting an enemy army (they keep on attacking the endless stream of fleas instead of advancing to your base) or scouting.

There are some units that are better than others, but this is mostly because Cavedog went bankrupt so no more official patches. This has been addressed by unofficial mods though.

I see.

I just wonder if my patience would pay off. I mean, Warlords Battlecry II doesn't take long to drag me into its gameplay. I hope TA would be exciting eventually.

I'd suggest you play a couple maps that you think you will like. Remember that you're supposed to be playing a game because you like it but I do have to admit that there are a few games that won't catch one right away, but will definitely be worthwhile.
TA is a bit different in that it doesn't really have the rocks/paper/scissors mechanism, it's mostly about economy and outsmarting your enemy (be it long-range/out of range of your enemy, or be it fast surprise attacks into the weak rear of the enemies heartlands, it also depends if you play against AIs or against humans).

Play a map that has your interest. For me? I for instant liked islands, I liked the challenge of having to do some island hopping and using mostly ships and air to tech. But sometimes I actually want to build the large kbots and other times I just want to swarm with Panthers (L2 medium lightning tanks which are very speedy and also have anti-air) or a mix of units.

And if you don't like a particular unit or want to make it stronger...then go ahead and change it, it's really not that hard (many files open up with notepad)

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

Westwood implements rock-paper-scissors with vehicle and infantry. Infantry is generally weaker, but you can amass more infantry --hence more firepower-- in the same amount of space. There are weapons that are more effective against infantry, and those more effective against vehicle. Tank has strong armor and firepower against vehicle, but try killing infantry with tank cannons and you're in trouble.

Blizzard's rock-paper-scissor model is implemented with melee and ranged units. Footmen are basically meat shield for Archers, etcetera.

Where does Total Annihilation stand? Is it more like Blizzard or Westwood? From such little experience I had, it feels more like Blizzard, where infantry bots and rocket bots acting as meat shield for artillery bots, but correct me if I'm wrong.

What pisses me off about starcraft - and what I love about the C&C series is that in C&C you can maneuver your units to AVOID shells and non-homing missiles - the same can be done in TA, but is impossible in Starcraft as all projectiles are "homing".

I remember Tib Sun. Multiplayer was fun, at least before cheap custom 'gold' maps became the norm.

I played Tib Sub before StarCraft and immediately disliked the control system, especially the limited 12-unit selections. OTOH SC was undeniably a more inventive and original game.

My top 5 LAN RTS's are
C&C, RA, RA2, Warcraft 2, C&C2, AOE2
(OK I cant count but when my mates came round in the late 90's they all usually got at least 1 play each)
Single player
RA2, Empire Earth, AOE2, RA, Warcraft2, C&C

The first C&C is my all time favourite, its just the lack of skirmish that holds it back. Followed by Red Alert, but the silliness of RA2 keeps drawing me in.
I really didn't like Tiberiam sun, or any of the Dune 's I'm just not into the space theme.
Age of Empire's, Empire Earth are fun but drag out far to long for multiplayer (me and my mate always specified build time, there was never a quick game)
I like Warcraft 1 and 2, finished them both but just preferred the gameplay of the C&C universe. (like Errius said, whats the go with limiting how many units I can select!) Also hated StarCraft, again probably due to it being in space.