Well, RA2 you have to have a sense of strategy, or good economy know how, neither of which a 13 year old have.

I think, either gaming is like a fad to teenagers and they will pass, or you have to be a geek. No, being a geek is not bad, just different from being psycho or a jock................... or both

When C&C 1 came out I was 9 or 10, and it was my favorite game. When C&C RA came out I liked it more than the original. Now, I was younger than those kids, and I didn't find the games hard until you got to the last few missions.

Now, to hear kids say C&C RA 2 is hard, well it just bugs me.

in age of mythology, I only found one mission hard, nd it was timed. I"m the kind that makes a massive base/army, then all of a sudden launches a Blitzkreig. I cheated on that one.

Naw, RA2? your're kidding right? Its so easy you dont evne need a sense of strategy or economy. Just charge yourself outthere and pummle whatever is in the way. For good strategy think Starcraft. Both CnC and the craft RTs games are really good in their own way. SC and WC for good proffesional matches and CnC for very quick games between friends.

I suppose you all mean singleplayer? Sometimes those little skirmish games can get to be tricky. I always hated fighting Americans, they dump like a million little people at you about everyone 2 minutes. Now RA2 online, wow, omg, even noobs are hard to beat there. And I naturally hate Brits, Lib's, Raq's, and Germ's. In game of course, easiest is them bloody Russians.

And these kids sound like they haven't got a clue about what RA2 even is, or even know what they want. So I'm guessing, they are probably hyper, and RA2 is not a hyper game.

And you may not think about it, but you are using your fat little noggin when you play C&C games. That rush, was just planned. That sniper just outside base perimeter, planned. Now I personally, am not a person who rushes with large amounts of small things, I build up my base, get defenses, get my economy going, then I build a few big things, like 4 Kirovs or 4 Dreadnoughts, and send those in to pick on the enemy, GI's are for defense in my world. I tend to end up with barely any losses.

Planning world domination needs patience, and thats something a 13 year old hyper sugar'ed up kid does not want to do.

By not hyper meaning you havent seen me play. I use mousing skills learned from Warcraft in RA2. meaning Im giving more micromanagement orders than what I normally would with CnC macro. That provides a more spread out yet still concentrated attack focused not on one target but everythnig that is in the way. If you play with the right people, not the turtlers, any CnC game can end within 3 mins.

These kids give up too easy on games we cant expect them to be able to last too long later in life. Its a good thing not everyone is like them. However I can say that majority of today's kids are like that especially with those damned PSPs and other portable consoles - they hardly move or do anything productive.

CNC and CNC RA 1 did take some strategy. However, RA2 single player was far to easy. I beat most of the maps with mostly G.I. for Americans (Campaign mode). As for Skirmish I build up a large army and don't even bother with base defense, because a mobile base defense is the best. Ever since CNC RA 2 CNC games have been more of a just build a few units then blitzkrieg their base.

Hell, I beat the last mission in CNC RA 2 with a few chrono troops. Then nukes I got nukes because I take over bases instead of destroy them, it's how I've always done CNC.

However, CNC multi player is where the game is at. I never had trouble with Star Craft multi player or War Craft, but you see some mean ass CNC players out there.

General difference between a CnC player and a SC/WC player is the economy. CnC players would rarely bother about economy. Once 4 refs have been set up money wont be a problem anymore. In SC/WC however, winning a game depends upon how many mines/fields you can secure and how to micromanage your troops and utilize skills.

If that sounds too hard for certain people then they are rather hopeless as those two are actually the easiest RTS games to play. (yet hard to master).

With CnC multi player, the major thing is you run out of resources. Excluding Generals. If you have a good multiplayer map going, the end result is one player runs out of tiberum or ore, then you eat away at their base while you run the last of their funds down.

However, with CnC, you have to play right too, because you will get slaughtered if you don't have proper defenses or units. Also, you have to keep in mind that if you build your base to far apart then you leave you stretch your resources thin to keep it defended and if you build it to small it gets slaughtered by the super weapons and certain units.

I found CnC to be much harder than SC on multi player, campaign mode as well. However, SC skirmish was harder, I dunno why.

One thing I found in CnC to be a good idea for winning is not to turtle your base by defending it, instead secure and prevent the enemy from gaining any resources at all. It is much eaiser to win with your enemy helpless and the easiest way to do that is leapfrog each resource patch until you have the enemy surrounded and deprived of money.

I will split this thread as it is already another topic.

Capital idea! Yeah, it got a bit off topic.

Any ways, when you're playing a good player on CnC the match turns into making attacks that will cost the other player more money than you spent attacking. Good players don't go down easy, and if they can't get the resources, then they will make sure that you don't get it either.

With star craft, there was more Micro managing small attacks too keep your enemy on his toes, while at the same time building a strong army. However, I never got into many good matches that made it till the end in SC. The few good players I got to play against rarely stayed till the end of the match.

Well the general differences between the play styles show in their use of peripherals:

SC/WC players can click really fast with good coordination. They are ctually rated by thier clicks per minute - and professional SC players actually hit over 200 I believe.

CnC players on the other hand rely more on speed. Since build times are barely anywhere near slow like SC, good CnC players cna have a fully functional base within the first 10 mins and usualy by the first 3 mins the fight has already started.

SC2 is now leaning to combining the blitz tactics of CnC and the detailed strategic gameplay of the original starcraft. Which is a good thing for both players.

Generals on the other ahdn can never be considered a true CnC game for many reason

That I agree with 100%. I hated generals. No cheesy cut scenes.

Its not just the cutscenes its the gameplay itself. Generals doesnt deserve the name CnC. (and of all CnC games I think it was the only one that got banned is many countries because of its content with the Chinese and the terrorists.)