User blog:Ranger-X/Tiberium Alliances vs. War Commander

You may already know this, but I am going to come clean anyway. I stopped playing War Commander again for two reasons. Reason 1: I couldn't keep up with the special events since my life got in the way (this happens all the time to me and I can't avoid this). Reason 2: I was bored with the slow game play. Of course I could have switched to Rogue Assault but I sent my cell phone back to Apple in the mail. Plus I prefer PC gaming to mobile gaming (this is mostly because I grew up with Command & Conquer games, which are mostly PC games).

I am going to compare War Commander to my favorite online RTS game Tiberium Alliances, which you can try at this link. It's free and you don't have to pay for anything. War Commander is kind of like that, but there are some important differences, which I will list below.

Argument 1: You play as more than one faction. When a player begins a world in Tiberium Alliances, they can choose to side with either GDI or the Brotherhood of Nod. Both factions play radically differently: GDI is more traditional and prefers heavy tanks, while Nod prefers hit-and-run maneuvers and camouflage. While I like siding with GDI over Nod (due to my hero preference), I am playing as both factions in one world (I will not give the world's number in this blog).

Argument 2: All of your faction's tech is available, but you have to earn research points and credits to buy them. Unlike War Commander which forces you to play special events (which appear once a month) and earn experience points, you can attack Forgotten bases everyday and buy new tech. This is also true with Command & Conquer 4 Tiberian Twilight (except you have to win skirmish games to level up). I prefer this design in a strategy game; it is always fair and it respects the player's lifestyle. Kixeye does grant special offers, but you have to pay gold for them. I thought most of the offers were pointless.

Argument 3: Command points in Tiberium Alliances limit the number of times you attack, unlike in War Commander where you have limitless tries. I would normally call this a bad thing, but it actually helps me not be addicted to the game 24 hours a day. Plus TA lets me run simulations of battles so I can plan my strategies in advance. WC doesn't allow that (I wish it did).

Argument 4: Movement in Tiberium Alliances is limited to going in a straight line from base defenses to base structures, while War Commander limits the player to six points of entry. This seems like a bad thing, but it does make attacking bases easier for me. I can arrange my ground and air units in four waves (which are separated by ten seconds of deployment time). Like I said in Argument 3, simulations help me plan my attacks early so I can get it right the first time.

Argument 5: There are points of interest (or POIs) on the map that grant stat bonuses if I move my bases near them. The only catch is I have to be in an alliance or create my own. I love this concept because POIs can make a big difference when I fight against the Forgotten (TA's rogue faction). I wish War Commander had something like that instead of deposits, which I feel are useless.

Based on these five arguments, I believe Tiberium Alliances is the superior RTS game. Maybe I am biased because I was a C&C fan first, but this is how I honestly feel. Would I like to see War Commander design exactly like this? Absolutely, if Kixeye followed EA's example or sold out to them (I know this is a bold statement, but I do not think EA is that bad a company).