The daddy of strategy...

[Sui]

It depends on what you mean by balanced really. I mean, a side can simply be worse than another because its units aren't as good...or it can just be a little more difficult because its made for more advanced players. The side may be as good or better but be a bit more in depth. Then it could always be that they are different....Perfectly balanced and might as well be identical but look different, like TA really.

i mean there are 3 armies, then each army is split into 3 generals with specific attributes.. like the infamous SW gen gets a SW araura plane that cant get hurt before its attacked its target, AND is the unit with the highest damage in the game, PLUS it is a huge explosion that can take out whole armies.

And on the same note- USA air force can PWN other USA armies, as all of his air units block rockets, and USA defences are ENTIRELY rockets, other than this one 1337 unit which can take loads of health off air... but is SO easy to kill and costs the same as a war factory.

as you can imagine, generals was just USA vs CHINA, USA vs GLA, CHINA vs. GLA etc, while zero hour is 9 + 3 origonal armies... so its impossible to be balanced properly.

 

[Dedalus]

long story short, this happened over and over, and these guys had so much defence in their base, sneak attacks and rebel ambushes were impossible. so with GLA having no air, it was impossible for us to win and both sides had reached a stalemate, as neither could breach the others armies / defences. and so we quit, deciding not to waste any more time.

had the armies been balanced, there would have been a way for us to win...

what you just described is an example of perfect balancing. personally, i didn't buy Zero Hour because Generals was enough for me, and it was balanced well enough. so from how you're described it, Zero Hour seems well balanced. a balanced RTS should rely on how the player uses the units available. if neither are able to win then it means the two teams are evenly matched, and it only comes down to the human element. or something...

 

[Sui]

what you just described is an example of perfect balancing. personally, i didn't buy Zero Hour because Generals was enough for me, and it was balanced well enough. so from how you're described it, Zero Hour seems well balanced. a balanced RTS should rely on how the player uses the units available. if neither are able to win then it means the two teams are evenly matched, and it only comes down to the human element. or something...

i see your point, but the reason we had reached a stalemate was because my enemies where CRAP at everything other than building defences and never tries to attack us once... i mean they could have EASILY got loads of air in todestroy my defence, or bombed me then attacked, or sent a chopper with a black lotus in round my base... but NOOOO, they just sat there and watched our feeble attempts at trying to kill them. we were about 4 times better than them, and yet the fact that GLA have no air meant that we had no way to attack other than feeble ground units.

Trust me, it was very unfair to us, but they were just really, really crap at attacking or any type of strategy. if i had been air general or SW general, the battle would have been over all to quickly.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

I want c and c 3!!!

 

[Pressure]

Tiberian Sun/Firestorm was addicting.. Girlfriend broke up with me because she always called me while I was in the middle of a game and I said "hold on one second" .. I don't remember about the phone until 15 minutes later ;/

If she couldn't understand the importance of a Tiberium Sun match then she wasn't good enough for you. What I do is turn down the volume and say "Uh huh", "That sucks", "That's cool" or "Why?" That's it you don't even have to be paying attention and then when they ask you like "What do you think I should do?" just say "I dunno, that's a difficult decision." It always works trust me.