On 5/03/2013, at 11:23 AM, psydev <notifications@github.com> wrote:

> I typically have my strong resource base already established before I build a FIX and would build an MCV.
> 
The point is that it creates a number of viable build orders instead of the "one true order" that everyone must play to win.
E.g teching immediately to FIX and AFLD/WEAP, and focusing on building secondary bases in parallel with the primary base vs focusing on building up a monolithic base.
It also indirectly supports capturing enemy buildings to produce their tech (unless somebody broke this) and combining GDI and Nod units for interesting combinations.


> So what is your proposed fix?
> 
Again, see #2156. Each construction yard can only place structures within a fixed radius around itself. Base walking is entirely eliminated, because each FACT is limited to its own radius. If a player wants to expand their base towards another player, they must move the MCV and only start constructing after it has been deployed in its new location.
This is simple to do in C&C because the production queues live on the actor (in RA it lives on the player) so the building placement code can query the location and build-radius parameters without any complicated plumbing.


> I think that multiple build queues are simply inappropriate for C&C. It was not in the original, and doesn't really make much sense to add, and I don't think it adds much to gameplay (while it certainly detracts). I think it risks turning the game into a basewalker's paradise (picking up an MCV in a crate virtually guarantees a match will follow this course).
> 
The only downside that i'm aware of is the base walking, which can be fixed without removing the queues. What other gameplay detractions are there?


> Instead of multiple queues, I think instead there should be production speed-up. That way you still get the advantage, but without the crazy bursts of sudden construction, powered by conyards on the other side of the map.
> 
One of the original goals behind C&C was to avoid being "RA with Tiberium", because I considered the RA gameplay to be dull.
The biggest change towards this was adopting the Tiberium Wars build model, which I think is a nice modernization of the classic style.
Obviously, there are still some issues with the current OpenRA implementation, but it's silly to throw the whole concept out over one simple problem.