Tiberian Sun harder than RA2

[OmEn]

Ever since I kid I have always found Tiberian Sun twice as difficult as Red Alert 2, from a playing campaigns on hard perspective. I blitzed through RA2/YR on hard very easily with not too much difficulty but holy hell in Tiberian Sun I am really struggling to get through some missions and this is me playing as an adult now with 20+ years of C&C experience on my back as well and some of the timed based missions are a hell of their own.

Would anyone else agree to this?

[Cat]

Red Alert 2 has plenty of scripts while you're playing the missions where your communications lieutenant gave warnings, comments about the enemy units, tells you what to do during gameplay, etc. TD, TS and RA missions were mostly explained in the briefing and then just throws you in the mission where you have to figure out everything most of the time.

[Mati_Lublin]

Intel officer is nice but it's not his lack of presence what makes TS difficult. Player is simply thrown into mission with weak/fragile units (often critical) against stronger enemy.

[The C&C Strategist]

Publicado originalmente por AlexanderRavenheart:

Also, while the disc throwers are cool, they are so clunky and their attacks can completely bounce over the target.

There's actually one instance where the discs bouncing works in your favor.

Destroy Vega's Dam: https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8mnlgb?playlist=x7xsjb

Around the 5:30 mark. You can lure in and pick off a rocket infantryman. Make sure you don't destroy all the SAM sites beforehand. Once you've picked him off and destroyed the last SAM site, you'll have the engineer to repair the bridge and bypass several Nod units.

[The C&C Strategist]

Publicado originalmente por Der Geographielehrer:

I am a bit suprised about the answers. I think this game is very easy and bad balanced. I play with Nod on hard difficulty , and there was only 2 hard missions . Blackout there the Enemy often Attack and Salvage Operation ( hardest mission in the game in my opinnion) . The other missions were extremly easy. The enemy didnt attack . I just build units and kill them. Its even more easy then RA2.

In Blackout, if you relocate your MCV. you won't be attacked as much. Here's how I did it.

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8mgglk?playlist=x7x44e

Mission starts at 1:15.

[Cat]

Newer games tend to give you warnings. I imagine if the same treatment was given to Tiberian Sun, we could have the Intel officer warning you about the artillery in Rescue Prisoners and how to beat them.

At least that's what most games do nowadays when they gave you a difficult situation like that. I don't think red alert 2 or generals ever put you in that situation where it requires multiple retries to figure out. Those games only have one hard mission that's about being overwhelmed by enemies (operation: red Revolution and nuclear winter).

[Nero]

RA and TD are by far the hardest C&C games.

Rescue agent Delphi or the indoor ones of the nuclear reactor give me nightmares.

[Crusader (Banned13x)]

The older the games are, the more difficult.

I'm not sure why; maybe it's quality of life features making things easier to manage, or maybe people got dumber, or the devs know that in order to appeal to a broader audience the games had to be more accessible for a greater number of players.

There was a nice balance between challenge and enjoyment in the early/mid 2000's, but now all games in general seem a bit too casual, not just RTS games.

[Insano-Man]

There is no single cause that can be easily pointed at for the difficulty shift in games as time has gone on. They all contribute in some way. Much as we can definitely say the industry has gotten worse, it's not solely on the suits for this.

Me, personally, though, I'm finding Tiberian Sun to be easier than Red Alert 2. The AI in base-building missions is limp. Commando/no-base missions are just puzzles. I was asleep for most of the Nod campaign, and the GDI campaign is only giving me guff when the AI spawns with pre-placed artillery.

Meanwhile, RA2 had me gritting my teeth in every mission that had Yuri or Yuri clones in it. Fighting an enemy where every other unit has mind control is an absolute slog. I cherished every Allied mission with a sniper, and every Soviet mission with siege choppers. That's not even talking about the levels where half the civilian buildings on the map are pre-garrisoned up to the max.

[CthuluIsSpy]

Yeah I'm replaying it now and even on hard it's a lot easier than I remember it being. I don't know if the steam release is different to the CnCNet release, but the AI is pretty weak. I remember having trouble on the second GDI mission when I played it last time, but now it's pretty easy.

Edit : Scratch that, Defend the Crash is ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ on hard. Too many bikes.

[MeltingPotOfFriendship]

Publicado originalmente por SWS Sterps:

Overall i agree.

What I personally found is the difficulty of C&C games decreased with each successive title.
Sure most titles have their hard levels, some made harder by unintended/not thought about consequences from patches, but overall the earlier titles are hardest.

Tiberian Dawn has lots of difficult campaign levels in both campaigns, and the Covert Ops are another level entirely. These test you for knowledge of the game and usually require specific strategies.

Red Alert can be difficult in some missions due to a tight countdown time that allows for little errors and constant moving, and also some levels with scripted events that occur that if you're not ready for them, they can be end of you. Tank spam generally makes it a bit easier.

Tiberian sun then again has its share of hard levels that require specific strategies or play styles utilised.

RA2 is definitely easier, there a couple of harder levels like Red Revolution which i felt were a step up in pace compared to other levels.

My guess? That was EA meddling. They wanted the series to be more accessible and not scare away people because let's face it, the C&C is not a PUAP for an everyday person. Westwood I'm sure did all they could at the time in order not to ruin the games. But after TS&FS, they were starting to get tired of EA getting in their way and demanding things and rushing them all the time. Seem to recall the CEO of Petroglyph (which is a dev comprised of loads of C&C vets), more or less threw EA under the bus stating that the monkey suits would constantly interfere.

[rufustfirefly42]

Just finished vanilla Tiberian Sun campaign. What I found the most striking is the huge gap in difficulty between the GDI campaign and the NOD one. I finished GDI in around 15 hours and NOD in less than 4. The last two GDI missions specifically are really difficult on Hard, but most of them require a lot of micro and trial/error. The hammerhead base one also stands out in that regard. They are also well designed, like a puzzle, see last mission for instance. Maybe frustrating for the modern player, but I liked the figuring things out aspect.

On the other hand, NOD missions seem designed by a completely different team. Base-building ones are trivial due to the artillery, which is insanely OP and actually made me wonder how multiplayer must have looked back in the day. And the ones without base building are a matter of finding the right path and rushing it. I did it on fastest speed start to finish, which goes to show how non essential any kind of micro is. You can safely clean every campaign map with less than 5 artillery pieces.

Onto RA2, via Firestorm now. So up until now, in terms of difficulty (for which the best gouging method is adding the time spent on campaigns) I think it's TS GDI > RA2 > TS NOD.

[MeltingPotOfFriendship]

Publicado originalmente por rufustfirefly42:

Just finished vanilla Tiberian Sun campaign. What I found the most striking is the huge gap in difficulty between the GDI campaign and the NOD one. I finished GDI in around 15 hours and NOD in less than 4. The last two GDI missions specifically are really difficult on Hard, but most of them require a lot of micro and trial/error. The hammerhead base one also stands out in that regard. They are also well designed, like a puzzle, see last mission for instance. Maybe frustrating for the modern player, but I liked the figuring things out aspect.

On the other hand, NOD missions seem designed by a completely different team. Base-building ones are trivial due to the artillery, which is insanely OP and actually made me wonder how multiplayer must have looked back in the day. And the ones without base building are a matter of finding the right path and rushing it. I did it on fastest speed start to finish, which goes to show how non essential any kind of micro is. You can safely clean every campaign map with less than 5 artillery pieces.

Onto RA2, via Firestorm now. So up until now, in terms of difficulty (for which the best gouging method is adding the time spent on campaigns) I think it's TS GDI > RA2 > TS NOD.

You'd think that Nod's missions would start pretty hard (not counting the "tutorial" missions), then would get easier later on because they are building momentum and resources to use against GDI. And yeah, the artillery is still beyond OP. It eventually got patched out because of the issues people had in MP because yeah, hard to have a fun time when someone has like twenty of the things pounding your base from half the map away when you are still building it up. Add to that, it's an AOE weapon as well. As for GDI, once you get the MMII and give it a proper escort, it's a literal whirlwind of ruining Nod's day. The Nod AI really has no counter for it (like a human player would).

The original C&C was far harder. And portrayed the factions as realistically as they could (the lead of WWS confirmed it). GDI is a powerhouse of tech, and starts off and with a clear advantage. Whereas Nod has to scrimp and scavenge by looting, raiding, and stealing and other criminal tactics in order to fund their efforts. On the flipside, they essentially controlled the media in-game. If anyone remembers, in that one mission, they land a PR coup against GDI which essentially puts GDI on the defensive. I always found it kinda wild that the media (like it real life) plays such a vital role in it all (ironic no?). In the words of CABAL: "Control the media, control the mind."

I re-approach the series from time to time (playing rn :D) and it still burns my ass how much content and features WWS had to cut in order to appease EA and prevent them from spurging out even harder. Now to be fair, the FS expansion added a few of the features they had to cut from TS. But there was still stuff on the cutting room floor. Pretty sure there are mods that address that. But I'm fine with the un-modded game.

[DB]

For old schoolers, RA2 was when the winds changed. They went more arcadey and open to audiences with the graphics, gameplay and the rest. After being a hardcore fan of RA, RAR, TSFS etc, I couldnt wait for RA2, I waited years for RA2 and hated it when it dropped..........

[MeltingPotOfFriendship]

Publicado originalmente por DB:

For old schoolers, RA2 was when the winds changed. They went more arcadey and open to audiences with the graphics, gameplay and the rest. After being a hardcore fan of RA, RAR, TSFS etc, I couldnt wait for RA2, I waited years for RA2 and hated it when it dropped..........

At that point in time, EA was meddling more in their games/production and trying to make them more accessible ie:more corporate and easy to digest and apply to a wide range as opposed to the niche RTS filled at that point in pc gaming. Which is fine, but it's a dual-edged sword that can end up with it causing more harm to a brand than good if it's not handled right. Westwood pushed back and managed to keep the stuff that fans of the other games wanted. They still had to cut content from the base game and like in TS, they added some of it back in YR like they did in TS:FS. I think by then, a lot of the Westwood staff were starting to put 2&2 together. They were already losing patience with EA going full corpo and ruining their ideas/plans for TS and had to basically grit their teeth to work on the FS expansion. RA2 while it got great praise (even though the plot was full of holes and the graphics were not very good), did not live up to the expectations EA wanted ie: it didn't exceed the unreasonably high sales they wanted. RA2's story and characters were what I always enjoyed. Then again, I'm a huge sucker for CA's and well known actors hamming it up in a game.

Long and short of it, EA cannibalized WWS after RA2. Most of the original C&C staff(save for one of the main founders) had quit EA and WW by then and eventually formed Petroglyph, which carries on their C&C heritage in spirit and why EA had to come crawling to them to pretty please with a cherry on top help them with the re-re-remaster of C&C:TD and RA!


RA3 was an atrocity. Saved only by the grace of Tim ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ Curry! And we don't speak of that one C&C game that never existed ever.


TealDeer: Blame EA.