How exactly is the game different from warno for a casual rts player

[ArchFlameAx7]

So i have very passively observed the game over the years and from what i understand its a bit like world of conflict mixed with warno. But i was wondering how exactly this is different from warno

Like for example Are the units a deck system or is it more like world in conflict with unlimited units?

[Ahriman]

You have a combination of both.

You have a deck system akin to WARNO, but the difference is that the units you put into it are unlimited in a sense that if you lose them, you can call them back after a timer. There is a limit how many of them you can have in your deck, and subsequently on the battlefield, but whenever they are removed from the field, be it by dying or recalling, you can call them in again after a short cooldown, and when your income ticks back.

Like WiC, you have a set amount of total points that gets lower with units you put onto the field, and slowly comes back when you lose units unlike the steady income flow of WARNO.

In terms of combat, again more like WiC, technically speaking there is no missing in the game with direct fire weapons unless the target has some form of countermeasures, such as flares, and instead units just 'tank' the hits with simple health bars. The main addition is that your units can suffer criticals such as damaged optics, detracking, and the like, but otherwise doesn't have the RNG to-hit chances of WARNO.

Focus is on teamplay vs individual player, like it was in WiC MP, though it isn't as extreme as it was then. You don't have roles, it is the limitation of points and the relatively low unit count that means that if you try to do everything as you would in WARNO for example, you won't be able to react to sudden situations, let alone actually push.

In short, if one has played WiC, the game will definitely feel very familiar very quickly.

[ArchFlameAx7]

so more a thinking mans warno sick i usually play warno with smart orders and don't miciro more just focus on my role as a commander sounds like this game is more my type of style i watched some MP last night and from what ive seen the Decks system is very built to if you want to focus on a certain theme you can which for me is very cool

[Ahriman]

Originally posted by ArchFlameAx7:

so more a thinking mans warno sick i usually play warno with smart orders and don't miciro more just focus on my role as a commander sounds like this game is more my type of style i watched some MP last night and from what ive seen the Decks system is very built to if you want to focus on a certain theme you can which for me is very cool

It's a neat game, with really the only main problems vs WARNO being that TTK is absolutely insane in BA. Assume that everything dies to one hit, unless the unit in question is Infantry not running a ATGM. Regular Infantry squads with old fashioned AT Launchers will get run down by basic IFVs and tends to get hunted down in forests and cities by them unless you have aplenty of Weapon Teams hanging around. Regular Infantry in general only has the use that they are cheap and come with actually useful IFVs, where you can toss the Infantry onto objectives to act as bullet magnets and general time wasters so you can drop a nuke or a swarm of cruise missiles to prevent caps.