Battlezone 1

I reinstalled BZ2 again in the computer.
It was a long time since I played it.
Unlike BZ1 I never ended BZ2 because I got stuck in a mission where I had to protect 2 miners (they are not scavengers to me).

I realized about the pros and cons of BZ2.

Among the cons I feel BZ2 is quite static.

In BZ1 scavengers were in motion, while in BZ2 they are mining drones. In a way this poses an inconsistence. It is harder to me to defend static miners than scavengers that I can move. You lack the mobility of BZ1. I feel less freedom.

Also aliens look like bugs, which is not very original in my opinion. Missions are mostly about fighting waves of incoming bugs, not really about strategy.

For some reason the alien forest does not seem too exotic to me. I could imagine something more like an underwater world in a jovian moon or perhaps methane based biology in Titan which could be more exotic

User interfase to control units is visually quite confusing. It seems that designers need some lessons on usability engineering.

In a way I feel that the level of the missions was dumbed down a bit. I do not feel the steep learning curve of BZ1.

Biometal collecting is very slow. It makes us to wait just too long.

Scavengers were like SCVs in Starcraft. Recycler was like command center. I liked the first person Starcraft feeling of BZ1.

Now the pros. The visuals are neat.

From a narrative point of view it is acceptable.

I liked to see dropships moving and delivering things, as it makes me feel there is something alive.

I liked the interaction with panels and other characters.

I think you pissed off about 100% of BZU (All 15 of them)

I agree with the part about fighting bugs. I also think the game had weak weapon sounds, similar weapons, weak storyline, a scrap system that made no sense, and don't get me started on the team-colors in multiplayer


BZ II could have been much better than what it was, but it was lacking many things in the effort to become the next big thing since Ramen noodles.

That game is so different from Battlezone that I find it's name "Battlezone 2" inappropriate. I prefer to refer to the game as just "Combat Commander". Although the game concept is the same (FPS/RTS Hybrid) the game is completely different. I got bored somewhere in the Combat Commander Campaign and quit playing, it was just too boring. All I did was follow Commander Shabayev around and blow stuff up. Boring. The shooting control physics are way off from Battlezone.

Battlezone on the other hand wasn't boring. Straight from the very first NSDF mission, you are a commander in charge of a base/production units. In the 2nd mission, you have to immediately destroy 2 attacking fighters, then set up your recycler and prepare some defense. Battlezone is simply a better game than Combat Commander. The Red Odyssey is more of a "Battlezone 2" than Combat Commander ever was.

I did not say I do not like BZ2, so BZU people should not hate me. I just pointed out pros and cons.

The cetonians were stranger than the bug aliens. And bug aliens gives me the feeling of playing Starship troopers. The lack of strategic elements in BZ2 amkes me feel like it was more FPS than FPS/strategy like a FPS Starcraft. I missed the Starcraft part.

I do however like the visuals that look good even for today standards. Even if the alien forest is not quite original, it looks good.

I would not say it was boring, I'd say it was dumbed down a bit to lower the steep learning curve, a product for young newbies, not for old BZ fans.

If I had to give it a name I'd call it "Battlezone Wingman" where you are a wingman, follow others a blow stuff. If it is about being a commander, Fleet Command or Starcraft makes you feel you are in charge, BZ2 does not.

It's possible to enjoy both games.

BZ2 vanilla single player did have some...drawbacks. But where it really shines is in modding capability and multiplayer strategy, and arguably scrap management is 10x more important in bz2 than bz1.

The "miners" you call scavengers seems appropriate, but for the increased weight and decreased speed comes the advantage of resilience. An SP tank in bz1 can clear a group of scavengers in seconds after a battle, but if you have one scavenger sitting in the battlefield and you win a fight, your team gets all the scrap from that battle. You can use them as cover since they draw heat rockets and are easy to fly behind and around. Dropping NAV beacons at scrap pools makes it so you can just send them to the NAV instead of directing them.

Defending the "miner" once it has deployed can be tricky. If facing AI, gun towers and turrets is sufficient. If facing humans in strat, you can't really focus on defending particular pools. The objective is to kill the other player's, since if you know the build tree very well, you know what he or she can and can't build with however many pools. Whoever controls the pools controls the game, which makes scrap management very important.

Granted I never seriously play BZ2 for deathmatch, since it just doesn't work for me. In DM, all the tank physics etc. do come to bother me, but as far as team strats go, none of that matters. In fact, bz2 might be one of the best examples of teamwork play in games to this day. FPS and RTS team games are mostly just shoot individual other players as an individual. BZ2 strat, your team must focus on moving forward with certain goals. If you move off on your own, you will be killed. If your squad goes out hunting, chances are you will sweep the other team and maybe one of their pools. It's come to the point where I prefer BZ2 for the strat but bz1 for the DM, since BZ2 really is the team stratters game. When you get in a 3v3 with some erally good players, THEN you can tell me how slow scrap comes in

EDIT: Comstar, you haven't tried multiplayer yet it seems from your posts. So many things have been done for it, along with single player, that it would blow your mind. In one such single player mod (and perhaps the single hardest piece of BZ related material you could ever find) the enemies literally ARE bug like creatures, and when they rain, they pour. Endless waves while you franctically try to hold them off with a meager base as the planet comes apart ...

BZ multiplayer is more intense than BZII multiplayer, in reference to strat. In BZII, you get a "Commander" to do everything for you, and victory depends on that one persons experience. In a sense, everyone who isn't a commander is pretty much on their own (especially if the commander is a tard). In BZ, you manage your own fleet and assist your ally when needed and must cooperate together for victory (each player is seen as an equal threat because of their own force). 2 separate fleets are stronger than one large one controlled by one person (the larger, the more time you spend managing your fleet instead of fighting on the frontline).

Scrap in BZII is about as cool as Vanilla ice, I hated it from the get go. The more scrap pools you have, the more advanced units? Hmmm. A new joiner to a game in progress is less likely to succeed because of that concept. BZ1, everyone has a fair shot at scrap...all you can do to claim it as yours is to put units in the area to temporarily protect it. In BZII, everyone rushes for the pools and puts heavy defenses in the area for that one sole scavenger/miner (normally when it's upgraded)...as loose scrap is not seen as very valuable.

The constructor in BZII is also a joke, you need at least 2 to have an efficient base and they are slow.

Oh boy, here goes...(you had to push the issue )

"BZ multiplayer is more intense than BZII multiplayer, in reference to strat. In BZII, you get a "Commander" to do everything for you, and victory depends on that one persons experience."

Have you not seen the dogfights in bz2? You are constantly on the move, up close and personal, sometimes with 3 invisible tanks firing salvos of 3 different weapons in series hoping to claim the upper hand. In bz2 strats (at least the ones that should be taken seriously, not a group of newbies pretending they know strat), there is ALWAYS an opening dogfight, and it is fierce. Without skill on your side, your team will be swept into an early disadvantage. Very important aspect is who wins the fight. If somehow you avoid it, you will start attacking a scavenger with your team to lure them out and THEN have it. If the commander is doing everything for you, then you aren't being an effective player. Sure an amazing commander can triumph over a team of lessers, but if in an equal amount of players on each side and one team has a legendary commander but is severely outgunned, that commander will never be able to hold pools or tech up.

"Scrap in BZII is about as cool as Vanilla ice, I hated it from the get go. The more scrap pools you have, the more advanced units? Hmmm. A new joiner to a game in progress is less likely to succeed because of that concept. BZ1, everyone has a fair shot at scrap"

The more pools, the more momentum. It is like "capture points" in some games. FFA games are less likely to occur in BZ2 for logistical reasons, though, so it is tough to compare on that point. In BZ1, BZ2, or any other game, the late joiner has a disadvantage. If a joiner comes in late, you already have a base and maybe a small army. All the scrap on the map may have been consumed, and then they must make scrap, and you know how controversial that can be. Team strats are "usually" not swapped out to many times with player arrivals, but if they are then that server is considered "hosed" since everybody had to lag out or drop for teams to become unbalanced. Actually, hosts will sometimes refuse to launch until teams are even and balanced in skill. Momentum is KEY in bz2. The more you gain, the more you can push against the enemy. This isn't to say the enemy cannot counter attack you creatively, but that's another issue

"...all you can do to claim it as yours is to put units in the area to temporarily protect it. In BZII, everyone rushes for the pools and puts heavy defenses in the area for that one sole scavenger/miner (normally when it's upgraded)...as loose scrap is not seen as very valuable."

Let me re-order that first line: All you can do is to claim it as yours temporarily and protect it. The farther from base you get, the harder it is to protect. Your best bet is to keep attacking the other guy's pools. What can he do? Nothing, really, but keep attacking yours as well. Keeping the pools occupied can be difficult enough when all players have skill. This early period of the game is where the commander is slowly building up the base as well. When you say everyone rushes for the pools, I'm assuming you mean early early game (the first thing you do). In a team strat, your team will fly around the map dropping NAV beacons on the pools to send scavengers and turrets to remotely. If you run into the other team during this period, well, opening dogfight! Heavy defenses in the area? ONLY when (if) it's upgraded, not normally. Getting gun towers onto a pool is usually considered wasted scrap since they are easily destroyed with MDM. Turrets suffer the same issue. I've only been in 2 real team strats where 3 or more pools were upgraded, and that was with the BEST of the BEST of commanders. Instead of seeing pools as large infrastructure, see them as the source for many many many hit and run attacks.

"The constructor in BZII is also a joke, you need at least 2 to have an efficient base and they are slow."

Yes, they are slow. Luckily they don't have too far to drive, though, eh ? 2 Constructors are just more things in your base for the enemy to strike when they come flying in from every direction, chainguns blaring. Good players in a heated strat can produce power, factory, and armory in 5-7 minutes, including the time it takes to outfit 3 scouts with chaingun. 10 minutes can be tanks, 12 for tanks with blast cannon. The game can last varying amounts of time from there.

It's ok if you don't like it, but I have a blast at all the little micromanagement things that have a BIG impact overall. The team that was sending blast cannon-laser tanks at you a few minutes ago? You just destroyed two of their pools, now they are sending little scouts back at you! Revenge.

I have been replaying BZ2, I am about to rescue Shabayev.

The mission is about taking my fleet, leaving it a bit behind, snipe the bug turrets, and if I find a gun tower, then I should attack. Fleets are very reluctant to obey when I ask them to disengage, which makes them to go for suicide pursuits.

The problem of miners that mine too slow instead of scavengers is that it makes you think more about mining than actual strategy. And since they refuse to disengage, I prefer to keep them behind where they can't misbehave with their suicide trigger-happiness that costs me resources.

The fight for mining places makes the game to be focused around such places, unlike chess or BZ1 where strategic value of a place depends on the circumstances, forcing players to adapt to rapidly changing situations.

Now I am absolutely assured you haven't played multiplayer team strats.

"scavengers is that it makes you think more about mining than actual strategy."

My friend,

THAT IS THE STRATEGY!

Hint for that mission: Fly over the wall and approach the rescue NAV from outside the map. Hop the canyon when done.

Put hornets in rocket tanks via factory, spires won't stand a chance.

MDM is your best friend.

Don't fear charging in full force, IIRC there aren't very many defenses to contend with on that map. Spires do nothing really fearsome to anything bigger than a scout anyway.

There are invisible tanks (on radar) in BZ and invisible (literally) tanks in RO. The dog fighting in BZII go too old, since the scrap pools pretty much ruin everything. You rely more on winning dog fights than you do incorporating strategy...and the bigger force always wins if the battle is taking place in unclaimed territory. Creating units in endless amounts just kills the strategic aspect since managing 10 offensive units takes much more skill than managing 30. If you lose, oh well...you still hold 2-3 scrap pools, whereas BZI winner of the battle gets the scrap as a reward. The Commander in BZII relies strictly on his "subordinates" to do all the dirty work, all he does is supply the materials and set up the base. This is where BZII killed it for me, I got tired of having to create units for players to do their offenses when in BZI every player is in charge of their own fleet. Secondly, you have to know what you're giving each person on your team and if they can use it effectively.



Late joiners in BZII are normally just screwed, people always put those absurd GT's at scrap pools wheras in BZI turrets or offensive units control a large scrap area for a temporary amount of time, then move on. BZI new joiners simply strafe/thump those defenses (BZII splinter is a joke) or ally up (2v2) and move their units into their partners territory. There is no way to judge anyones skill in BZII, and it's the same in BZI (well, aside from already knowing them). Hosts normally wait for full games to launch in BZI aswell, they are usually recruited in the lobby beforehand (which BZII lacks for some reason).

BZII just didn't fly well, at all. Many players anticipated much more, but got less in the end. I was one of them, in fact I bought BZII on the Xmas it was released.

The only thing in a veteran strat you will give to your thugs (the word used for non-commanders) is a scavenger to deploy or a new ship.

It is very, very rare in a vet strat for many offensive units to be built at all. If there are, it may be two rocket tanks, a few maulers (walkers), or an empty scout that a pilot walked into. A given team may not have more than 5 AI units at a time, including roving scavengers. Managing 30 offensive units? If a team has built 30 offensive units in a vet strat, something has gone horribly horribly wrong. If there are gun towers by scrap pools in a vet strat, something has also gone horribly wrong.

Not collecting scrap from battles? If in that battle you and your teammates killed all enemy scavs and you still have one in the area, you claim the field. While they are in the air, it is a good time to attack the enemy base and kill their constructor.

"The Commander in BZII relies strictly on his "subordinates" to do all the dirty work, all he does is supply the materials and set up the base."

If in a vet strat your commander is doing this and is not also the host, he will be kicked. There are around 3 times a commander will be in his base for a length of time: 1.) Building new weapons for everyone when the armory is built 2.) changing the loadout in the factory/recy 3.) getting more pods. Everything else in the base is either defending it from attack or just a flyby. You may have heard of bunker commanders, who will not make it out of MPI and may never last in a strat at all without being kicked. A commander in BZ2 sitting in base is one less ship fighting the enemy, and that simply doesn't work. Attacks on the enemy base are team efforts and more human pilot oriented. Instead of doling out tanks to everyone, you would amass your team, make sure they have very few or no pools remaining with which they could rebuild as you attack, and run in. If the commander's base is defended enough, he won't have to sit in it. Another reason the commander won't sit in base is because the other team logically can't strike your base if you are the one with momentum.

Late joiners in a vet strat? If a vet strat lasts longer than 1/2 hour, things went horribly wrong . Any money spent on gun towers around scrap pools could have been blast cannon tanks, so a smart commander wouldn't think of wasting it on pool defense. That is, if the other team is nice and lets them build a factory

"Hosts normally wait for full games to launch in BZI aswell, they are usually recruited in the lobby beforehand (which BZII lacks for some reason)."

I can 100% assure you that this happens in bz2. In fact, the 30 minute wait before a game starts is absurd sometimes and also ritualistic. Vets arguing over team balance, who the posing noob is, and how much they rape your mother can even last up to an hour. There is the dodgeball-style commander picking style, though. Two players send a number to each other. Commander that guesses closest picks first, etc. Game starts, plays 5 mins, lags out, then the whole wait happens all over again

"Secondly, you have to know what you're giving each person on your team and if they can use it effectively."

I can't argue there. A big issue with non-vet strats is people who have no clue that when you give them stuff, they have no idea what to do with it or if they even got it. Say for instance you make 4 turrets and pass them to some random guy. They may sit in a block in front of your recy all game. Scavs are worse. If you send a scav to a person near a pool while you are in base to deploy it, chances are you will see that scav roaming on the other side of the map later. Idiots are idiots, every game will have those. Get yourself in a vet strat someday, it will leave you breathless. The pace is lightning fast from the get-go, the first 2 minutes will be the biggest battlezone dogfight bash you have ever seen.

I'm sorry, but not meaning to be rude, none of you (posters above) know alot about bz2 strategy. (Apart from robotic, who seems to have a little bit of knowledge about bz2).

IMO bz2 has more aspects to its game and is alot harder to master than bz1..

Not meaning to be rude, but before being able to say that, you have to actually master the game. I don't know about you and BZ2, but in BZ1 you have strictly DM approach in strat, meaning you are missing more than just a few aspects, so you are very far from mastering the game in general.

Not meaning to be rude, but i've improved alot faster at bz1 than i ever would at bz2.
There are more aspects to bz2... believe me.
If we're talking about 1.2..
You wouldn't know anyhow, ive never seen you in a ZST Vet Strat

Why would you see me there? Self pronounced "vet" strat of a Combat Commander, fake Bz1's sequal, doesn't sound like a place where I would like to be seen.

Again, your statement that one game is harder to master than the other, doesn't make sense when you haven't mastered at least one of those 2 games you are trying to compare.

On the other hand, there's nothing wrong with you saying that Combat Commander is "better" than Battlezone. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but it is well known that CC is dumbed-down version of BZ. Just pick your words more carefully when expressing subjective thoughts, wrapped as "facts".