[C&C Zero Hour] 1v7 (Superweapon VS 7 Tank Generals) [Hard Difficulty]
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 ก.ค. 2022
- Challenge: Superweapon General VS 7 Tank Generals (Alexander VS 7 Kwai)
Map: Death Valley
Series: Command & Conquer
Game: C&C Generals Zero Hour
Mode: Skirmish
Difficulty: Hard
Starting Cash: $10000
Note: Due to the game's memory leaks and its 32-bit limitation of maximum 4GB RAM usage (to my understanding) I received the "serious error"/"technical difficulties"-crash. I then found some posts by erdemtekin here:
www.gamereplays.org/community...
and here:
github.com/TheSuperHackers/Ge...
where he pointed out that the patches might be faulty and the cause for some of the crashes. He had the files uploaded here:
drive.google.com/file/d/1GcNs...
and trying to switch out a couple of the files in my game directory seemed to work towards stabilizing things somewhat. Thus the "MISSING" in the title of the map. - เกม
![[UNCUT] รัฐสั่งหยุดปล่อยคลื่น! แต่หยุดพลังปะทุ “น้องหญิง” ไม่ได้ I คนดังนั่งเคลียร์](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RmQh47eIiV0/mqdefault.jpg)
Blown away by your elimination of the nukes midgame. Holy smokes that was efficient. Love the gameplay!
Thank you, I'm glad you could enjoy.
Usually I surrender if I am not able to build the counter Super Weapon (x2), but this tactic is pretty cool. I am not sure if the Aurora here are much powerful? It seems it can take down the Superweapon with 4 Auroras.
@@unwired I sometimes also build 2x superweapon to take out the superweapon of the enemy. This however, in a 1v7 game, requires you to build ~14 superweapons before they build theirs. However, if I focus on Alpha Aurora, I only need 3 of them to take out a superweapon, and I can build them much later than I would the superweapons myself. This means I can focus on secondary economy, even still after the enemy builds their first superweapon. And considering that there is little cost difference between 2 superweapons (2x$2500) and 3 Alpha Aurora (3x$2500), I find the Aurora to be the superior option in this case (as you can spend most of your early game money on secondary economy and base defences).
th-cam.com/video/bjL50Leolro/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/4JLoly0xdFQ/w-d-xo.htmlsi=FLppvCUuVfF1n4RQ@@clowngeneral
Take a shot every time you hear "Got a missle launcher right here".
Your responses are professional so is your play hope the best for your channel
Wow, thank you so much. I appreciate it.
CPUs Cannot build MIG Aircraft or long range vehicles (Nuke or Inferno Cannons) in China Tanks.
Nice Tactics by the way, You are Really Genius!
Now I know how to beat them.
Yeah, I definately choose my battles. Some CPUs who create long-range weapons are more difficult in my opinion. Anyways, thanks for the nice comment.
Even regular Auroras are OP in my opinion: cannot be hit until dropping their payload means they're basically a small Chinese Artillery Barrage for like $2500 a pop -- or however much they cost.
Once sufficient dough is being brought in, they pretty much ensure that the USA can Point & Click their way to victory.
Still, was entertaining gameplay; well done against 7 of them!
I've finally moved over to v1.6 from v1.4 and I'm struggling to solo even 1 Hard vanilla Chinese lol: can *just* win but only if I employ Cheese-strats rather than strats I actually enjoy using.
Heard there's an AI Mod which drastically improves the Computer's behaviour.
Regular Auroras are definitely OP as well, allowing you to "Point & Click" your way through the enemies as you put it. But the Alpha variant is even better, only requiring 3 to take out a superweapon, and with their insanely powerful fuel air bomb they easily wipe large armies at once.
I haven't tried the unofficial v1.6 or any AI mod to make the AI harder. I still can't beat some matchups of 1v7 with the "current" hard difficulty, so making them even harder might make it a bit closer to impossible.
@@clowngeneral Have you noticed on 1.4 that Medium Army will surrender after like 2 minutes on Starting Cash $5000?
@@AdmiralKhafre Hahaha, no I have not. Wow, that just goes to show how unfinished this game is, I don't even feel like I need to verify that, I just believe it.
Well that's a very clean match nice work bro
Thank you very much.
Did you manipulate the powerplants? Like how are they powering all the supply drops
No I didn't manipulate the powerplants in any way. The power plants of the Superweapon general give base power of 5 and an upgraded amount of 20 (300% increase), which is the most that any power generator building in the game gives you (excluding an "overcharged" advanced nuclear reactor of Tao, the nuke general, which gives 27 power while taking overcharged damage). This means that for each upgraded power plant, I can support 5 supply drop zones as each of those only requires 4 power.
As can be seen, in this match I don't use the EMP patriot missile defence system as one might often do. So there is no requirement to build up power for those. I also only ever build 1 superweapon, so the power consumption of my superweapons isn't too bad.
Very smart start. I continue to do this from all challenges on contra x. It help me too much. If caught 5 stars i buit 30 nuclear warheads and give end the game clearly.
Fell all your Auroras through your own Particle cannon at the end.
Haha, yeah, that was a mistake.
Great game man , but just want to ask why you do not use " EMP Patriot System " - s against China tank armies , it is probably best defence against them , your defence would be at least 50 % better ? 🤔
That's what I would have thought as well. However, the tank generals attack with their units side by side, not in a straight line so an EMP patriot missile system isn't going to stop the tanks behind the first ones (for there are no tanks behind). Then their damage is roughly equivalent of that of a single missile defender, I believe (not factoring in that the missile defenders gain veterancy). It didn't matter how much I tried to optimize my strategy with a main focus on the EMP patriots, once I tried the firebases I just realized that they were MUCH better in this scenario.
Maybe I could have sprinkled them in between the firebases, but there really was little point after I had figured out that the firebases were consistently reliable.
Even if I have multiple EMP patriot systems, they will often target the same unit, which is a good feature for most base defences except for the EMP patriots.
Because each EMP patriot can cost more than training a horde of missle defenders despite it has good defence
@@araisannanoda3688 Hmm, I don't quite get you I think. I would argue that the EMP patriot system is actually not that good in this scenario as the EMP variant has less damage (because it has EMP), and because the actual EMP ability isn't fully utilized because they always attack the same tank. Sure, maybe I would have built a few EMP patriot missile defence systems if their cost was about $200-$300.
yeah, firebases actually kill tanks, EMP patriots deal very low damage in comparison. 👍
All in one I only asked myself why superweapon general? if you don't really use her advantages except for energy wouldn't be air force even stronger if you already use airfields? Just wondering
Well, she has the Alpha Auroras which have the immensely powerful fuel air bomb. I think I even only need 3 of those to destroy a superweapon of the enemy. While that is an advantage, I wouldn't say it's the reason for choosing her. The reason is rather just to have a challenge. I try to play any general against 7 other generals and see if I can win. I might even try this matchup as Air Force general as well.
However, I've never been quite good with Air Force general. To me he requires so much micro-managing that I've never been able to keep up.
aside from firebases, you can station at least 3 tomahawk launchers for overlord. they can be more dangerous if you are not careful.
Sure, that might be clever. I however put a few extra missile launchers in front of my firebases to deal with any unusually large assaults from the enemy.
@@clowngeneral but they can be always getting killed by gatling tanks or dragon tanks if they get too close.
@@alphabarret7122 Okay, but at some point the missile defenders in all the firebases will have gained veterancy, most up to heroic, and then they are simply so much better that I doubt there is any real need to accommodate for extra strong attacks. The tomahawk's attacks are slow, so slow in fact that I believe that an overlord could be taken out by the missile defenders before a tomahawk even lands (if they begin attacking at the same time). But maybe the tomahawk has much larger attack radius, I haven't compared the two but I think you might be right, that the tomahawk has a larger radius, allowing for additional defences by sprinkling them in, behind the firebases.
do you think firebases are enough for base defences? i doubt not.
It sure was in this case though. I tried having a heavy focus on the EMP patriot missile defence systems and it was awfully bad compared to the heavy focus on the firebases.
@@clowngeneral but somehow it can give you some breathing room for massive assaults and stopping some larger units ahead.
@@alphabarret7122 Maybe, if there truly was a massive attack, some EMP systems could stop a few of the incoming tanks. This however requires some space, so one has to manage the building space in such a way as not to diminish the number of firebases/missile defenders as those are much more powerful.
Красиво, расчётливо всех наказал.
Thank you.
Been years, just downloaded the game. How to I unlock the specialized Generals?
Could it be that you have only got Generals, and not the Zero Hour expansion? The 9 different generals come with the Generals: Zero Hour expansion to the base/vanilla game Generals.
@@clowngeneral It's both. I only see the USA Superweapon General. All the other options for skirmishes are just the standard county. Do I have to complete campaigns on the highest difficulty to open them up?
@@billmorgan1189 The first ones in the list are "Random", "USA", "China", "GLA" and then Superweapon general. Can you try to scroll down or something?
@@clowngeneral lol, yes, just needed to scroll down. Thanks, like I said, been some time now.
@@billmorgan1189 No problem. Have fun playing.
i ve one question why cpu is not using generals promotions ?
I would guess that the enemy maybe just isn't getting the experience needed for the promotions. The only real experience they gain is when they shoot down my Alpha Aurora Bombers. But I had a scrub through the video and at around 34:24 you can see an orange bomber plane on the minimap in my base. It seems to carry an EMP pulse which you can see the aftermath of at around 35:00. So at least some of the enemies utilize their general's powers.
was it a strat that you let your aurora bombers fly at the specific area to guard, then attack? Than compared to just immediately attacking the nuclear-missle even if it was still on the airfield?
just a pattern I've seen frequently, I'm pretty new to the game.
@@enthusiasticpancake2876 Hi, yeah, having played multiple matches in this game I often encounter that my aurora bombers that I send to destroy a superweapon don't actually manage to destroy it. I believe this is sometimes caused by the fact that the enemy might have a dozer/worker besides the superweapon that can immediately go repair it in between my aurora bombers arriving. They manage to repair the building just enough so it survives the attack.
And sometimes a unit of the enemy (such as a troop crawler) is in front of the superweapon, and thus takes the bomb from the aurora that was meant for the superweapon. If this happens, I lose a good chunk of my attack's firepower, and thus I want to have my aurora attacks in rapid succession as to try to prevent the enemy from repairing the building just enough.
Other possible benefits of doing it this way is that I can have my aurora bombers "prepared", such that I can send them to attack with less of a delay, which might be beneficial if I forget to attack a superweapon until the very last moments before it fires. Also, if I keep them guarding a zone in my base, they don't immediately die if the enemy takes out the airfield by means of China Generals' power artillery or something similar.
Love this game
Hello my friend . This map is very laggy for me and can't be played at all. How can I fix it? Can you help me? Thank you
Hello,
If you check the description of the video I lay out a few links that I read up on and used in an effort to make my game run smoother. I believe I might have also used some information from the following: www.gamereplays.org/community/index.php?showtopic=972572 where I probably searched and found a tool to do this patching, something like this I believe: ntcore.com/?page_id=371 .
If these things don´t work, then something else to try is just to have a clean install of the game and use Legionnaire's Genpatcher: legi.cc/downloads/genpatcher/ , which is really quite handy.
This may work, however, I believe I still encounter matches that are more prone to crashing, for example when I play against 7 infantry armies or something. And if a match is prone to crashing, I try to play differently, I try to use support powers and auroras to take out large groups of units to reduce the unit count on the map, and I even try to build my defences less dense than I otherwise would (in an effort to maybe make pathfinding of units easier for the game).
thankful@@clowngeneral
Bro you are very strong good louk in your life❤
Satisfying
Thank you.
I tell what, Sir, try to eliminate at least one enemy as fast as possible. This means you, initially, decrease the power of your enemies. This can be done by taking out the nearest one. Yep, the nearest one is going to be your first victim. Yet, this can NOT be guaranteed if the Nuclear Alert of your enemies is ‘on’ to hit your base.
In some of my videos, I use the A10s from a generals promotion to take out the nearest' enemy supply building. This often leaves them without income if done early enough, and sometimes it so happens that the enemy has depleted all their funds on something ridiculous at this stage, so they have no money left and no income and just "resign". It is a way to take out one enemy early on, requiring little effort but some luck.
Where you download this game?
Maybe this helps: legi.cc/how-to/install-cnc-generals/
Can you do that in Shockwave Chaos mod?
Hmm, I might. I'm not that familiar with the mod scene in Zero Hour but it sure is something that I could check out.
Very good tactic 👍👍👍
Thank you.
U can use ctrl + numbers to make hotkeys for units
I believe I do this frequently, most notably for the Aurora bombers.
Looks fun
Sure was. It's always a fun challenge to find ways to beat these 1v7 scenarios.
@@clowngeneral can you make a tips vid for noobis like me
@@aproxib9389 Well, I haven't done anything like that so I don't know if it would be any good. There are a lot of tutorials out there, tips and tricks. Most of them go over things like shortcuts, which is always good to know. Anyways, I don't know what I would say exactly.
@@clowngeneral OK then thenks any way ❤️
Cool
Thanks
42:25 OMG
Hahaha, yeah. That was an absolute mistake.
@@clowngeneral Good Job~! :)
how you are defeating them??
Well I would hope that the title raises exactly this question, and consequently I sure hope that the video answers it. As can be seen in the thumbnail, the firebases play a large role in this match. Their placement and sheer firepower with the missile defenders goes a long way in defeating this matchup. The choice of map is also heavily weighed[?] in my favour, with high distance between starting positions and lots of additional income available. This gives me plenty of time to advance in the beginning.
Nice!
Thank you.
لو أنك وضعت الصين مشاة وليس دبابات دولتان فقط بجانب الدبابات
Hmmm, if you are suggesting a match against a bunch of infantry generals: I have done a few of those, but matching against 7 infantry seems to make the game crash way more frequently. I've had to change my style of play to beat some 1v7 against infantry, not because the infantry in necessarily better, but to prevent the "serious error" from occurring.
I respect the play.
--
But I see a lot of mistakes.
the most obvious ones are the huge delay in using PERKS and Nukes when they are ready.
The less obvious ones, are focusing on destroying energy/factories while keeping the money making ongoing at early game, if anything, nothing but money should be targeted first, especially against china, since their hackers can make a huge amount of money in no time.
Destroying tanks that are stuck in certain places is the best play to keep the auroras alive on their way back, also, besides the nukes, destroying closer enemies wouldve been much more fruitful to keep auroras alive than sending them a bit too far.
Thank you,
The reason I don't use the general's promotion powers right when they are ready is because I don't really think that they are that effective, and I would rather keep a power "in the bank" for use when I either really need to, or see a good looking target.
And sure, maybe I could have chipped away at the tanks/units on the board with my Auroras in an effort to keep them alive for longer, but I also feel like that I might either still lose them to other units or defences, or that the enemy is will just so quickly and easily replenish the units on the battlefield, making my effort to eliminate AA tanks an endless battle. I mean, every tank on the battlefield is often rolling towards my base, and my defences are packed accordingly so maybe feel like it would be unneccessary micromanagement to try this strategy, especially (and most importantly) because I already know that I can beat the matchup, even with the losses.
But sure, maybe I could do better to rush the opponents and take out their money and expand into their land area more early on.
I like this gameplay only one super weapon, Not spamming them to win
Yeah, I also feel like it is a bit cheap to just spam superweapons. If memory serves me correctly, I think I only built a particle cannon because it "felt right" as I was superweapon general. But I also feel like the Alpha Auroras are a bit cheat-y and thus I mostly use them when necessary and otherwise sparingly.
@@clowngeneral respect
If we turtle enough, the AI players would eventually run out of money and would eventually just stop attacking as they're running out of money. If only they'd invested in making more than 1 superweapon or also invest in having effectively infinite money, but no, they're designed to fight like a mid-tier player who wins with whatever they already got and nothing else
Yeah I hate how the "hard" enemies don't invest in proper long-term secondary economy. They always just build the bare minimum it seems, and it sure would be fun to see them expand over the map and build additional airfields/barracks/war factories/economy. In some sense I understand it as the game can't handle too many units or whatever, but it's still sad.
I don't believe the enemy "stops" attacking, but then again your were probably talking about how they attack way less in the endgame vs. mid-game. I often see this in my matches, where a few of the enemy AIs have gathered all the oil derricks and are the only proper threats.
imo, if the hard enemy is given actual AI training, it would be impossible to beat.
1) economy
2) no tanks stuck next to mountains or cliffs because they lost their routes
3) using the correct weapons accordingly to how the player is making their play
4) recapturing resources building instead of destroying them
5) strategic overwhelming of the player instead of a bunch of tanks that arent even reaching half way through
...
1v7 in generals in nothing but 1v2 but takes a bit more time than a 1v2, because u have 5 extra enemies.
the tanks will get stuck and delayed to reach, ull end up defending your base against 10 tanks at most from each side, with 0 waiting period for defenses to defend...
Nevertheless, the aurora play was impressive and limited super weapons is nice to see.
@@clowngeneral There is an AI mod that will make them significantly more efficient. Vanilla Hard is easy mode compared to Hard with the mod.
@@Abanks2013 Yes I've seen some videos on harder AI, from cncHD I think. But while there are still many 1v7 matchups on vanilla Hard that I can't beat, I don't think I'm going to be modifying the difficulty.
@@clowngeneral Oh I get it. I myself have only beaten a single 1 v 7 vanilla hard. I tried the Advanced AI and got demolished in less than 5 minutes. Instantly removed.
can you beat 7 random armies ?
That has been difficult when I've tried. And also, there is no option to "rematch" such a game as then it wouldn't be either real random or a real "rematch". The gratification of improvement comes later than for these 1v7 of the same general type of games. And if I really tried a random match and created a new one every time I lost, then when I finally win, I'm not sure I would be happy with that win as it could be that I was just lucky with the random enemies and/or my tactics in that game miraculously fit the enemy armies. I would have to be able to consistently beat 1v7 random to truly feel like I could beat a 1v7 random, and so far I'm not at that point.
تعجبني طريقة لعبك ✨❣️
Thank you, I appreciate it.
Game name ???
Generals: Zero Hour from the C&C (Command & Conquer) series.
Generals is the base game, Zero Hour is the expansion.
You are the General of this game, right? It means you achieve victory with the least losses.
Well sometimes it's just a matter of victory. If I wanted to win with as few losses as possible, I would probably build a massive superweapon platau and annihilate the enemies one by one.
@@clowngeneral Bingo! Sir.
Как настоящая Америка: давить современными самолётами😂
УГ - говорят русские в таких Моментах
42:35🥲😅😅😅
Почему патриоты не строишь? Они также эффективны, как и огненные базы.
As I explained in an answer to another comment around here, with the question "Great game man , but just want to ask why you do not use " EMP Patriot System " - s against China tank armies , it is probably best defence against them , your defence would be at least 50 % better ? 🤔":
That's what I would have thought as well. However, the tank generals attack with their units side by side, not in a straight line so an EMP patriot missile system isn't going to stop the tanks behind the first ones (for there are no tanks behind). Then their damage is roughly equivalent to that of a single missile defender, I believe (not factoring in that the missile defenders gain veterancy). It didn't matter how much I tried to optimize my strategy with a main focus on the EMP patriots, once I tried the firebases I just realized that they were MUCH better in this scenario.
Maybe I could have sprinkled them in between the firebases, but there really was little point after I had figured out that the firebases were consistently reliable.
Even if I have multiple EMP patriot systems, they will often target the same unit, which is a good feature for most base defences except for the EMP patriots.
hi
Hello.
Зашита канешнаше класная но от маего точке зрения ябы зделал зашиту с танками сильными танками
لديك دماغ نظيف في اللعبة لكنني أستطيع ان أسحقك بهذه اللعبة ههههه
Might well be true, but I don't do any PvP. That's something I try to avoid in other games as well. PvP means that two consecutive matchups are probably vastly different from each other. I like tackling the challenge of AI matches as I know where I failed or what I did wrong so I can try the same match again but with a slightly different strategy. In some sense the gratification of improvement comes sooner.
@@clowngeneral good reply.
@@muhammedrasheed179 Thanks.
Noob tactics :D
Thank you.
@@clowngeneral you just defend your base. Then you just use your auroras...very boring!!
@@MTalac Well I wanted to win. I tried some other tactics, but as I'm neither good at nor fond of excessive micromanagement, this was the way to go, I believe.
Too many unnecessary builds and loss...
I know I e.g. could have built several dozen superweapons and annihilated the enemy that way, but I chose not to. And sure, maybe some other buildings are unnecessary, but if I compare to top-level players of this game I see that if I want to win a 1v7 match with fewer buildings, my micromanagement has to be soo much better.
lol ure bad
Thank you.
u r slow. u take the camera left and right up and down so many times. u distract us when we want to watch. you can make the time of the mission shorter but you don't want to. the left supply was ready to be taken by your chinooks. yet, you don't sent them to collect cash.
I believe I eventually sent my chinooks to the left supply. If they were shot down by gatling tanks, I wasn't sure if it would be economical to rebuild them as they would eventually get shot down again. As can be seen, I utilize the left supply stash as a choke point and I could not succeed this battle otherwise, so I couldn't have just built my defences further as to include the stash in my "base".
Sure I may be slow, but it is my run. I'm just having fun, and of course trying to win. Sometimes that requires me to sacrifice a good view of some combat related material to management of some kind, be it base-building or micromanaging other units.
If you have a playthrough of this where you succeed faster and with more views of interesting combat, then please link me the video, I would like to see it.
Thanks Muhammed "this channel doesn't have any videos" Rasheed
@@orionred2489 Haha, yup.
@@clowngeneral I did before but I didn't upload it, Sir.
@@muhammedrasheed179 Would still be interesting if you would repeat the match, record it and upload. I could compare to what I do, would be interesting.
boring
Anything in particular?
@@clowngeneral The fight should be or super efficient, or fun or with some weird/unusual tactics. But you play as I usually play on Sunday afternoon after 2-3 beers. Is nothing bad about this, but don't expect tons of views and appreciation.
@@clowngeneral Don't listen to these downers! I sit and watch these, then usually spend the next few days seeing if i can incorporate some of your tactics when I play too. It's a blast to crack open this game about once a month and lose a few hours.
@@Dienaris Well it sure would be interesting to see how you would tackle this match, if you have a link to a playthrough of yours. I understand that this may not be as entertaining as you would have hoped, but I would argue that this is still somewhat of a difficult match, provoking curiosity in how I was able to win it. In fact, to date, this is my most viewed video, so I assume that I did at least something right compared to my other videos.
@@orionred2489 Thank you, I really appreciate it. Usually I just laugh at the negativity, but sometimes I try to see it for the message. A rant might as well be just someone's poor way of communicating his thoughts.
But more interestingly, what, if any, tactics have you tried to incorporate into your own play?
Very easy game without MIGs.
Well, still somewhat difficult I would like to argue. But after I settled on a strategy that worked, sure, I could beat it more frequently.