Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Adoge 16 Apr 2016, 3:00

We may never get Generals 2 or another Command & Conquer so I made this as more of a thought exercise.

Essentially I want to hear what your vision of Generals 2/a near future/technothriller RTS would be if you were put in-charge of developing said RTS. (I myself love ROTR and think it's probably the best continuation from Generals so far, I'm interested to see what your ideas are). So feel free to detail story, factions, gameplay, generals, whatever you want.

Here was what I threw together earlier. Essentially the Eurasian Unity League has been the predominant power for the last 20 or so years since the Zero Hour Crisis. The GLA has been licking its wounds whilst expanding its networks in Central Asia, Africa and other wartorn countries devastated from the GWOT. The New Unionist Party has ascended to hold both a majority in Congress as well as the Presidency in the United States for the last 7 years, having massively expanded the US military's capabilities and spending, with the US' primary tactics now revolving around Shock and Awe heavy amour divisions supported by CAS and some drones. This revanchist USA has already announced its intentions through heavy-handed interventions in destabilised West African nations as well as aggressive Naval and Ground exercises in the Central and South American regions. However the EUL is not as united as it once was. The European nations become more and more polarised by the day. Movements and political parties dreaming either of a return to the European Project and a future on the international stage, or the return of the USA as the global hegemon now challenge the EUL-backed parties that have held government for 20-odd years. Protests, marches and stand-offs are now a common-sight in European capitals. Even amongst the Chinese-backed European governments there are rumblings of equality, as the proud continent of Europe seeks to return to its former glory. The Europeans' foot out the door is only one of the concerns of the EUL's Chinese leaders. Russia, revitalised through the sale en-masse of its Gas and natural resources to other EUL nations now demands its position as an equal partner at the head of the EUL whilst the United Korean Republic, rising as a technological and economic giant on the doorstep of China, presents new challenges to the otherwise accepted leaders of the EUL. As the threat of war looms on the horizon the three superpowers prepare. Once desolate American Airfields and Vehicle Depots now bustle with soldiers and equipment, EUL military bases thrum with life as new divisions arrive daily, and across the forgotten lands of the world, terror networks plot their return to the global stage with a bang.

These are the (initial) three factions I imagined. The US and China (EUL) have sort of almost swapped roles with the US now preferring heavy armour, ballistic (gattling/vulcan weapons etc.) and tried and tested weaponry over its more initially advanced self, whereas the EUL now offers a more diverse unit roster with many specialised units. However some things haven't changed, the US units are still generally more expensive and fielded in fewer numbers and their logistics weaker whereas the EUL tends to value cheaper units that tend to be fielded in larger numbers with strong logistics.

USA: Lower tech powerhouse/cannon, values heavy armour and close air support. Tanks, armoured (and preferably tracked) vehicles and helicopters. Smattering of lasters and advanced tech but values armour and firepower over numbers, speed and cutting edge tech. They are the best of the best in the armour department and only the late game tanks of the EUL have anything to threaten them. Their tech includes Lasers, Ballistics, Drone and Microwave weapons and technology.
[Note: I've had thoughts about adding a small group of European units to the US who represent US-backed European military units who have been training in the US and now seek to retake their continent with the support of the US' Tank, Drone and Helicopter Divisions]

EUL: Balanced and most advanced, the EUL has a diverse array of units to deal with many situations, however they lack the armour or firepower of the USA, or the speed and stealth of the GLA and instead rely on their units fulfilling specific tactical niches. They tend to outnumber the US due to superior logistics but cannot produce units as cheaply and quickly as the GLA. Their tech includes missile, flame, ECM/EMP and railgun weapons and technology.

GLA: Subversive/Horde, the GLA values speed, stealth and ambushes in order to win their war of liberation. Lacking the armour/CAS of the US or the specialised units and advanced air force of the EUL, the GLA have to be patient. Whilst their units are the cheapest of the three factions and the quickest to produce, they must outnumber their enemies outright or utilise speed to overcome determined enemy resistance. The GLA also benefits hugely from tunnels that allow them to exercise map control easily against American Tank Divisions and EUL rapid reaction forces. The GLA benefit heavily from speed, tunnels and stealth, as well as a light air force geared towards raiding. Their tech includes toxins, explosives and scrap.

Posted by: TimeBurner 16 Apr 2016, 9:58

This gave me cancer. How could you!? Just,how could you!?

Posted by: Comrade M.P 16 Apr 2016, 10:01

Yeah you just wanted to shitpost something and you found a good excuse for that. Good job *thumbs up*

Posted by: Adoge 16 Apr 2016, 10:01

To be fair man I did say may.

In all seriousness though maybe we will get a game in the future, maybe not. We'll just have to wait and see.

Posted by: Comrade M.P 16 Apr 2016, 10:09

Actually, I'm happy that We're not gonna have any more CnC games. Cause each new cnc game was worse than the previous one (After ZH all CnC games werent as good as ZH). RA3 came after TW/KW. It was way too ugly, cartoony graphic, some.... ridiculous metas (Mecha tango lets go! ^10) and other goofy stuff. C&C 4 was horrible. Not many people like cnc4. (But I actually play both and like them, but not as much as ZH/ROTR)

Posted by: TimeBurner 16 Apr 2016, 10:17

Yeah,but,seriously,maybe sometime a community will just decide to do it for themselves. There are lots of C&C fan potential game devs out there,(SWR and Sarge,for example) that could give and suffice the C&C fanbase. ot to mention the enormous support and donations the fans will give when the news breaks out.

Im imagining a classic c&c,general's style gameplay. No aliens,no super high techy stuffs like we got in c&c 4(sorry for mentioning that) Just a plain classic c&c with improved gameplay (pathfinding,true sight),improved graphics on a better engine.

As for the factions,I think I would stick with ROTR lore.


PS: @Masoud Pakrah : Too many flavour and you chose to be salty. (Sorry,not as good as Rik in memes)

Posted by: mr_Skittles 16 Apr 2016, 11:06

don't forget the atrocity that was cnc alliances the online browser game.

Posted by: Sargeant Rho 16 Apr 2016, 14:49

I've been writing up some ideas for a mid-future RTS, it's not really related to CnC, but I might as well post some of it.

It's around 2050, there are 2 main powers in the world: APTO, Atlantic-Pacific Treaty Organization, encompassing most of Europe, the US, Canada, Japan, Australia and South Africa. It's the successor to NATO. Comparable to the US in Generals, being the most technologically advanced faction with world-police-syndrome. And the EAC - East-Asian Coalition: China and Russia, most of south-east Asia. Presently at war with APTO. Heavy hitters, relying more on quantity than quality.

The story would take place in Japan, Korea and China, where most of the fighting is going on.

The point where it does overlap with CnC somewhat is the base building, which works via s system similar to the construction yard.

Though there are various types of resource "deposits", they all produce credits, with which units and upgrades are bought: Banks, Oil Derricks, Metal deposits, destroyed units, etc.

All sorts of units are present: Ships, Tanks, Infantry, Aircraft, etc. APTO's focus is mostly on their aircraft and fancy high tech weaponry, so they get aircraft carriers, and a variety of aircraft, while lagging behind in the ground combat department a bit. EAC instead rely on mass production, inundating the enemy with tidal waves of tanks. The two factions are respectively geared more towards defense for the first, and offense for the second faction

Just about every unit has at least one ability: MBTs can fire smoke grenades, HEAT rounds, etc, general infantry might be able to fire grenades, and aircraft have countermeasures.

Superweapons and Special Powers are a thing, but the former are more like those in Act of War than those in CnC.

I disagree. RA3 is, so far, my favorite "3d" Command and Conquer, followed by Generals and CnC3

CnC4 was actually a half decent game, but it was a horrible CnC.

Posted by: Graion Dilach 16 Apr 2016, 15:09

RA3 atleast had something of a meta. RA2 Soviet game = spam Rhinos and Desos. Tiberium Twilight was an asset pack for modders. I'm quite certain that's what it is. The online game was a rehash of the C&C3 assets on the other hand.

Also, no offense, but plain classic C&C isn't even close to Generals. Generals introduced the unit abilities bar and dynamic support logics which added a lot of depth into micro (before Gen, you had Radar Jammers in RA1 and GapGens/Stealth Generators/EMP at best as support, besides these, Gen had Frenzy, Avenger laser, driver killing, proper upgrades (this was in D2k though and D2k is kinda an odd-one-out when it comes to classic C&C), propaganda (healauras), ECM, mainstream support weapons (this one can be argued on, but they had a lot smaller role previously) etc). That's not something plain classic C&C had. (Individual factory queues also change a lot on the pacing of the game towards more macro but since classic C&C was more macro-focused, it's effect is negligible.)

Don't get me wrong here, Generals is indeed a great game, but - as well, as say UT or Quake 3 Arena - it doesn't have the gameplay flow of it's predecessors.

Plain classic C&C have a future already in the form of OpenRA which will quite probably reach the maturity to run even YR without issues before this decade ends. Generals styled C&C... doesn't seem having such indeed.

Posted by: TimeBurner 16 Apr 2016, 16:03

I do agree with you.My point is,sometimes devs tend to make something unique and bring it up and implement it to the game,which most of the time,they over do it. (example is Act of agression's eco system) Or,they add up aliens or some super high tech weird buildings/units that looks absurd (maybe it's just me who hates too much weird stuff).

Posted by: Adoge 16 Apr 2016, 22:56

Sounds good man.

Are you thinking of just going with the two straight factions or incorporating some subfactions/generals into the mix

Posted by: Sargeant Rho 17 Apr 2016, 6:44

I'd actually prefer to have one extra faction, but I haven't had any good ideas for that one yet.

I would do Subfactions though.

Posted by: Adoge 17 Apr 2016, 7:24

What's the Geopolitical situation in the rest of the world. Is it ripe for an NGO force or are there other blocs that could be antagonistic to the first two factions?

Posted by: Sargeant Rho 17 Apr 2016, 7:32

There are no other superpowers, large parts of Africa and the Middle East are as wartorn as ever, South America is developing into a superpower, but I don't think they would be antagonistic to the other two.

Posted by: Adoge 17 Apr 2016, 8:04

Hmmm, so the APTO is NA + EU + Aus & Jap whilst the EAC is China + Russia + SEA.

South America doesn't seem to have the power projection to compete with a Western or Eurasian bloc especially ones like this in the setting.

So then there's NGO powers:

- A terrorist group, particularly a third world one, is just too cliche and basically goes into GLA territory.

- There's a PMC, which would need to be heavily funded and extremely powerful (unless it's a conglomerate of PMCs) but most of them would surely be working for the APTO and their interested would be invested in the preservation of a capitalist sphere.

- There could be a corporate force/PMC coalition existing if the conditions are ripe. For example the APTO has been sliding towards Social Democracy whilst the EAC has just become downright totalitarian. The Corporations/PMCs would want to drag the Western sphere back to a more status quo ante. They could be teemed up with Third world insurgent groups etc., providing funding, equipment and elite troops, whilst the insurgents provide low tier cannonfodder.

- You could always go with like a strange religion or group rising in third world areas and changing the global situation.

Anyway that's my two cents.

Posted by: Sargeant Rho 17 Apr 2016, 8:27

Well, 35 years is a long time. It took Nazi Germany a fraction of that to go from shambles to superpower. And Brazil and Argentina aren't exactly in shambles.

A PMC sounds like an interesting idea, I'd just need to be careful not to be too similar to ATLAS from CoD:AW, or Artemis from HAWX. I could actually imagine something like a mix of GDI and a PMC, being employed by APTO for certain missions.

Posted by: Adoge 17 Apr 2016, 9:07

A PMC can work really well if they have their own motives and aren't too similar to the parent bloc (APTO). And they'd need their own manpower and resources so they'd probably have to be a Consortium/Conglomerate of PMCs and supporting/shell companies, maybe backed by some Resource companies too. They'd also need a raison d'etre alongside the APTO and EAC.

Edit: Whilst they could technically be on the side of the APTO, this creates a sort of faction creep in terms of story-telling. Essentially you end up with the Act of Aggression situation where the Chimera and US were on the same side and the conflict wasn't as dynamic. A PMC/Consortium who at present is sided with the APTO but are actively pursuing their own agenda makes the conflict more dynamic and unique as well.

Posted by: X1Destroy 17 Apr 2016, 9:08

To be honest, RA3 gameplay is quite good. It's just the graphics and unit designs are ugly.

I wish we have a RA1 remake with graphics and unit camo that looks like those modern realistic games instead of being a blob of random paints and house colors.

It was fine in the 90s and early 2000s but now it's just an eyesore to look at.

Posted by: Sargeant Rho 17 Apr 2016, 9:24

Act of War handled the difference between the US Army and the Task Force Talon quite well, all 3 factions in AoW played very differently. Even though the TFT is part of the US Military.

Posted by: Adoge 17 Apr 2016, 9:37

Either way works. Personally I was just suggesting it because it offers an interesting dynamic between the two factions. But hey it's your idea/game and either way it can be interesting.

Posted by: Adoge 17 Apr 2016, 11:08

Either way Rho it seems like a good idea both the faction idea and the game idea in general.

Posted by: Serialkillerwhale 20 May 2016, 15:53

I'd drop Generals as a franchise and focus on making C&C GREAT AGAIN.

Read: An actual ending to the Tiberian series instead of that thing.

Posted by: NikCaputnic 20 May 2016, 21:19

Give this man a cookie.

Posted by: The General 16 Jun 2016, 21:52

I agree, i'd like ROTR as a new game but with SAP added and braking the factions into subfactions. Generals two was a major dissapoitment tho.

Posted by: XoGamer 4 Mar 2017, 13:28

RA3 was the most balanced C&C game

Posted by: (USA)Bruce 4 Mar 2017, 15:06

But even this had its issues, but In terms of REAL balence and not "making due with the tools you got" in zh, and not using the others.Or even using the tools as intended...
(Sentry drones were intended to give USA stealth detection like troopcrawlers or outposts did cause other then scans the only thing they got was recon drones that caused you to stop and let the drone scan and come back if it didnt get shot down)

Or Alpha auoras that were quite obviously made as defence killers, sure it can be used in other ways but the two explosions logic made it kill a chineese bunker and the dudes inside it or a tunnel and the hole.

I'll stop without getting to lost there but Ra3 had its fair share of "I wana be just like starcraft 2" aspects too

Posted by: Hecthor Doomhammer 4 Mar 2017, 15:56

As long as it has navy, like in Red Alert ( 2, 3) I'm happy
I need my Akula Ballistic Missile Subs!