Command and Conquer 4

Generals, Commanders and Comrades, please read this fascinating study;













Discuss

I couldn't read it all but I appreciate you brought in some words about Crawlers... C&C4 is such an underrated game. I know that many dislike it because EA modified the base building - indeed it is not a classic Command & Conquer anymore - but when I see how many people play League of Legends it is really sad that C&C4 as a great multiplayer game is neglected by EA and so unpopular in the RTS community.
Would be cool if the people created their own opinion instead going with the flow or hating it because "a friend of a friend of a friend said that it sucks".

Good article meth

Very well written =)

Hahaha, fantastic! Great read.

Though if you want to submit this as yout PhD thesis I should advice you to correct this small mistake, you write: "most American Cavalry Units of the 1940-1920 period were actually such light dragoon or mounted infantry units rather than the true cavalry of European and Latin American armies." Ofcourse you mean 1940-1920 right?

But overall a very nice piece, nicely done and very creative.

I enjoyed the read very much. I won't reveal the author at this point, perhaps he will reveal himself or perhaps someone will guess. All I know is that I enjoyed it very much, good fiction always crafts enough reality into it to be believable or possible and this certainly does that.

I'd very much like to see more.




This is oh so true. The fiction in C&C feels forced because it is which disappointed a bunch of folks understandably so. The game is not a true RTS which disappointed a bunch of folks understandably so.

But you know what? I've run into 1,457,091,187,908 people that played the beta and never tried the full game beyond the fiction. It's really a shame.

It's a fantastic article. It's absolutely fantastic!

Why is the author not known? Is he ashamed to have contributed something to CNC4?

Not at all this is just how he wanted it released. I suspect he will reveal himself in time if not I'll out him

I would be ashamed to have anything to do with Meth too.

Although I both follow the logic and applaud the authors efforts, I'm not so convinced that the "crawler technology" is necessarily a step forward, at least for GDI.

The point that is important to note, that seems not to be fully addressed is a point I made when the game 1st game out, is that the Crawler is an evolution Not of the MCV, but of the mobile con yard from Firestorm, sure its touched on, but not absorbed.

With mobility and rapid production and deployment comes a natural assumed or supposed drawback, strength/power/ durability. The game does not really address this balance at all, it just slaps 3 classes and says that's diversity and balance.

While the mobility doctrine fits Nod like a glove, and is expected to be generally mainstream ,GDI's dabbling with such tech has been largely support.

GDI is about defending the populous from the evils of Tiberium and Nod, having a rapid deploying all in one only solves short term concerns. A base would do better in insuring long term safety, security and governance.

For GDI to rely and adopt Crawler technology, it would suggest that their assets and resources across all aspects of their organization are somewhat lacking, and require the rapid movement and reuse of their assets. This logic however fits Nod better, as GDI has always been more organized and supported in funding and by the populous.

I too have the skill of using existing resources to craft something new, but it's important to know which past works should be altered or outright ignored.

In other words, just because the Crawler tech exists, and is efficient and effective, it in no way diminishes the reasons for building a proper base.