Soviet Union (Yuri's Revenge) vs. Soviet Union (RA3)

Which faction would win, the Soviets from Yuri's Revenge, or the Soviets from Red Alert 3? Personally, I would think the former - while they lack the versatility of the latter, but they have superior firepower. Any thoughts?

RA 3. Mainly because of how nerfed they were in YR.

That and how the RA 3 ones have more ludicrously destructive technology at their disposal.

edited 19th Oct '12 6:21:45 AM by ThatOneGuyNamedX

Please...the Apocalypse Tanks alone from Yuri's Revenge would tear through the Soviets from RA 3.

^We're talking about Command And Conquer, silly.

Speaking of which:

The RA3 tanks have cooler voices. The apocalypse cannot be stopped.

Red Alert 3 has the soviets fielding trained attack bears that are fired out of amphibious tanks.

That is all.

And it has the best version of Frank Klepacki's Hell March.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3rGO2WhZGg

Die Waffen Legt An!!!!

^^ Red Alert 2 has Soviet tanks that can destroy any foe one to one and still be able to attack air targets or more than one type of unit.

The tone of this statement indicates that the real purpose of this thread is to obtain confirmation/reinforcement of an opinion rather than to have a balanced discussion.

Besides, the Apocalypse Tanks alone from Yuri's Revenge would be helpless against the Soviet Navy from RA 3 if they did not also have the RA 2 Soviet Navy and the RA 2 Iron Curtain to back them up.

Remember, the Fake Balance article states that the RA 2 approach to balance was to make everything dominant against everything else. That can't be said of the other RA games including RA 1. Stands to reason that each faction was at its strongest in RA 2 besides the then non-existent Empire.

edited 19th Oct '12 5:56:26 PM by Recon5

Actually the tone of that comparison is the truth. Apocs in RA 2 were better than anything save ships one to one. Apocs in RA 3 have no such mojo, especially with their lack of anti-air defense.

Plus they didn't bobble like toys when moving.

The only units that would be a major problem for the Soviets in RA 2 to handle would be the Twinblade and the Mi G fighter. The Twinblade was FAR more versatile than the entire Soviet Airforce in RA 2, being capable of transport, killing tanks and infantry with ease, and having decent armor. The Mi G, while only capable of engaging other aircraft, was REALLY good at it's job, in fact much better than it's Allied and Rising Sun counterparts. And since the RA 2 airforce only had the Mi G bomber which in turn could only be called in by a Hero unit... well, they're pretty much SOL if they try to dominate from the skies.

There's also another one: the RA 3 Akula submarine. It's torpedos are so ridculously OP that just 4 of those suckers would be able to smash a fleet much larger than them before getting destroyed, and they tore up any structures placed in the water as well. The squid might be able to counter them, but again, their torpedoes were crazy powerful.

Ahh... memories of the Halo/ME comparison thread.

It's a bit different here. Since all three games are set in the same universe they should function by the same rules (minus EA messing up). However, the removal of Einstein in RA 3 would certainly justify the overall tech level being much lower given his inflated role in the earlier games' timeline.

Well, lower in some areas and higher in others. At the very least development priorities would have shifted significantly.

edited 20th Oct '12 3:04:10 PM by Recon5

If the series took it's own science, backstory, and internal rules seriously, then yeah, I'd agree with you. Thing is, they don't: the usage, roles and capabilities of everything in the games completely changes each time, with only the Tesla Coil and Gap Generator tech having the exact same purposes and functions throughout the three games. Also, because of the bizarre nature of the tech and units involved, you'd have a hard time trying to tell the difference between what was designed to feel powerful (such as the Kirovs, Apocalypse tanks, or Shogun Executioner), or what was made powerful solely for gameplay balance (such as the Allied Enforcers being able to buildings as well as vehicle armor apart with their shotguns, flak troopers being able to penetrate heavy tank armor, etc).

Now, if it was the Tiberium timeline we were talking about, then that would be a completely different and much easier comparison to make. The science is a lot more strict, and correlates easily to real-world weapon systems.

On another note...Romanov is a far better character than that idiot Cherdenko, and so are Dugan and Carville compared to Ackerman and Bingham. And the Imperial characters are somewhat insulting to Japanese culture/people IMO. Vladimir and Krukov would be more or less equal in terms of character appeal, but the former is more sympathetic than the latter (at least in the Soviet campaign for Red Alert 2). Personally, outside of the Tiberium series (apart from Tiberian Twilight for obvious reasons), Yuri's Revenge had the best story out of all Command and Conquer games.

Thank you for getting my point...despite all claims of superior versatility, the straightforward and overwhelming power of Red Alert 2/Yuri's Revenge units give them an edge or at least make them equal to Red Alert 3 units.

edited 22nd Oct '12 3:10:20 AM by BloodRavenFan

So then you were just looking for somebody to validate your point. Comparing stats, unit abilities, and such is one thing, but comparing characters is completely subjective.

And besides, unless there are hard numbers, a consistency in both the tech and lore, and a solid demonstration of their abilities against each other, a conclusive analysis would be impossible. For example, although I mentioned that the Soviets in RA 2 would have trouble against their RA 3 counterparts due to a lack of aircraft and gunships with solid Air-to-Ground / Air-to-Air capablities, who's to say that they don't exist in the background?

Its the truth...from what I've seen from both games, the Apocalypse Tank from Red Alert 3 is crap compared to the Apocalypse Tank from Red Alert 2/Yuri's Revenge. Even the Conscript from Red Alert 2 is stronger, at least when garrisoned. They tear apart even armored vehicles with ease, whereas the ones from Red Alert 3 are shit against armored vehicles when garrisoned. And even if its subjective, so what? We're discussing opinions - and IMO, the Red Alert 2/Yuri's Revenge characters are better than the ones from Red Alert 3. The Imperial characters in particular are completely ridiculous. Don't even get me started on the story (although Uprising was definitely a step up from Red Alert 3, and closer to Yuri's Revenge).

This is pretty much a complaint thread for you to bitch about how RA 3 is terrible for not being exactly the same as RA 2. Got it.

Romanov was an incompetent jackass. Give me Tim Curry any day. Plus, a Soviet aristocrat called Romanov? Bullshit.

Dugan was so boring I couldn't tell you a goddamn thing about him. "Screw 'em All" Ackerman was fucking marvellous, and only got the popularity he deserved when they used the exact same character for Cave Johnson. I agree about Carville and Bingham though.

And yes, the Imperial characters were ridiculous. Everybody was ridiculous. Glad you noticed. What exactly were you expecting from an over the top parody of Imperial Japan mixed with Animeland?

My main gripe about RA 3's characters is that they had nobody as iconic as Yuri himself. Yuriko Omega was a poor replacement, although I liked her storyline in Uprising. Still, I hope Yuri makes a comeback in any future installments.

Because a bunch of poorly trained yokels with rusting AK-47s would fucking crush a tank division in real life, right? I found the RA 3 conscripts slightly more useful because of their Molotov Cocktails.

No thank you - I'll stick to Romanov (what's wrong with a distant relative of the last Tsar becoming a Communist and becoming Premier) and Dugan (he's a peaceful character who prefers to negotiate instead of simply spitting out threats like a machine gun...give me a diplomat/democrat over a warmonger/republican any day) any day...or to any of the GDI/Nod characters. And who cares if its a parody of Imperial Japan - its outright racist that's what.

And last of all, the storyline of Red Alert 3 is completely sub-par compared to Red Alert 2/Yuri's Revenge (though Tiberian Twilight still takes the cake for 'terrible story').

edited 22nd Oct '12 4:40:17 PM by BloodRavenFan

This, we can agree on.

(If it's outright racist then there's nothing Fantastic about it.)

The Japanese characters were stereotypical, yes. But so were the Americans (war obsessed maniacs led by a trigger-happy warmongering Bush parody) the Brits (stuffy and uptight with stiff upper lips for all) and the Russians (...do I even need examples?)

And as for story... I love Red Alert 2, but to summarize: them evil Commies (led by a one-shot Iron Man villain from the mid-sixties◊) try to conquer the world with giant mind-controlling towers and psychic squid. It ain't exactly War And Peace.

edited 22nd Oct '12 5:18:59 PM by Vox

Ok, so I mixed up racism and fantastic racism...but I still don't like the characters from Red Alert 3 - they just rub me the wrong way (I don't like republicans, and I don't like stereotypical Brits). And IIRC, the Soviets didn't mind control the squids, since they kept them in Yuri's Revenge. And the endings for Yuri's Revenge were the best of any Red Alert game:

Allies: 'You behave, or no dessert!'

Soviets: "...the Golden Age of Space Exploration, thanks to Premier Romanov, and his bold new program..."

Mostly the Soviet one though - arguably the most conclusive and epic ending for any Command and Conquer game, IMHO. Simply put, Red Alert 2 and Yuri's Revenge were among the best Command and Conquer games, and Red Alert 3 spoiled their legacy (though Uprising went some way to correcting that).

edited 22nd Oct '12 5:37:46 PM by BloodRavenFan

From a purely gameplay perspective (and a few technical) yes. Categorized sidebar yes, attack move yes, a lot of things were done right. A few of the technical bits were done well too. For instance in the game files there's a tag named VHPScan. It basically made stuff auto-acquire smarter. Smart enough to where you'd fire 1 V3 rocket at a dozen Patriot batteries and only 1 would fire at it even though all 12 would be in range. That kind of intelligent ability was abandoned as of Generals.

There were few things that could have genuinely been improved upon from the RA 2/YR gameplay. Gratuitous abilities out the ass RA 3 style was not an improvement.

How exactly is that an improvement? Even if you were trying to bait the Patriot batteries into firing at the first V3 warhead, they'd still be able to intercept the others following after it, because they fire way too fast. Only way to truly get their attention would be to sacrifice an aircraft, such as the siege chopper or spy plane, because they'll focus on those until they're either dead or out or range.

^ It meant you couldn't sacrifice "dumb" aircraft like missiles to draw the attention away from AA defenses to let a real strike get closer. It also played them extremely smart to where it became more of a challenge to defeat.

Basically, it minimized wasted attacks allowing your AA defenses to fight smarter. In Generals you could have a dozen Stinger Sites fire at all the same target and down it, meanwhile the rest of the attack escaped. Were VHPScan functionality in the game, those Stinger Sites if set correctly would have distributed their fire more intelligently to where possibly none of that same strike gets away meaning you built superior air defenses and area denial.