A flight of Tomcats execute a low-level strike

Total Annihilation Explained

TA is a great RTS experience. If you have never played an RTS before, starting with this one will leave very little room for improvement. Cavedog created a complete surprise here, when Westwood was the de facto leader with the Command & Conquer series. Of course, I am not saying here that C&C is not good, far from that. Nevertheless, TA is better and has remained so even through the Red Alert series, which came after TA. Obviously, TA was compared to C&C at the time, which was the reference, so evaluating it has to be done in knowledge of what C&C offered to the battle-hungry masses.

First, let me be honest : I am hopelessly biased towards TA. I did play the C&C series for hours, it came first. But as soon as I got my copy of TA, I admit that my C&C CDs have gone to the locker and I only keep them because I keep all games I have ever bought. So, with that cleared, let us start comparing :

Forces in presence

Both C&C and TA use the story of a conflict between two factions. In C&C, it is EVA against NOD; in TA it is CORE against ARM. In both cases, the conflict is served up with a short explanation of radically different views on a given point of strategic importance which, in the end, the player really does not care about.

The Storyline

Although a story can be a nice addition to a game, the rabid RTS gamer pays only lip service to its importance in single-player mode. Of course, the story is much more important in massively multiplayer persistent universes, where it is the player that writes it, with his allies and enemies. Nevertheless, a good storyline for single-player experience is always a welcome addition.

On this point, it must be said that C&C is more impressive than TA. In C&C, you see a campaign unfold and the means to the end change following the units that are available and, more to the point, you get some first-person-like experiences where all you have is your trusty commando. The involvement you get from having brought your single unit to the successful completion of the mission has a very different impact from the anonymous use of dozens of look-alike units to steamroll an enemy camp.

TA also has a storyline and the player also gets to see a campaign unfold and the means to the end also change with the addition of yet-unknown units. However, one cannot help but keep a birds-eye view on all the (beautifully rendered) mayhem since there is no mission that you can win with only one unit. All missions, whatever the starting point, see you frantically start building solar panels and metal makers to fund your future development. From that point on, the only true difference in the missions is the speed with which the enemy finds your base and starts hammering your defenses. Presuming you had time to make some.

Units

TA has an astounding amount of units for a game of its time. More than 200 different types could be managed in the game. Cavedog astutely left the game open enough to enable user-made units. Although it was far from easy to do, quite a few units appeared and some fanatics (in the good sense) even catalogued the best of them in unit packs. With the standard units, Cavedog arranged for each side to have some similar units, and some unique units. Combat units are not identical, although resource units have often the same capabilities and cost, but with a look that changes. User-made units were, obviously, of all sorts. Not all of them were allowed for both sides and some were different following which side used them.

C&C has a unit count far less diversified, yet is the first to have resolutely broke away from the RTS pack where each side's units were the same with a different player color. Nonetheless, infantry is infantry and lookes and acts quite similarly on each side - then again, this is a combat between humans, so that is to be expected. Mechanized units are quite different and that probably increases the appeal of the game. Indeed, EVA and NOD are unique, so a player who can win with one cannot always win with the other as quickly. There is a mindset to adapt to before being able to get the maximum advantage out of one's military strength.

Resources

Both titles include resource management, but not approached in the same manner.

In TA, there are two basic resources : energy and metal. This is a refreshing plain and simple formula. No exotic properties, nothing complicated. The complete panel is available for producing energy, going from solar panels to hydro generators to fusion rectors to wind and even steam collectors. As for metal, two types of extractors exist per side, but there is another way of getting metal - transforming it from energy. So, once you get your energy production to exceed the requirements of your base, you can eat up the excess by transforming it into metal. Typically, energy is gotten way faster than metal, so this can boost your resource output.

C&C has only one resource : tiberium, that comes from a flower-like vegetation. It is highly radioactive and troops will die if exposed to it for a while. Only one unit can harvest the deadly flowers, leading to resource wars where one side tries to destroy the harvesters of the other, while protecting its own.

Artificial Intelligence

TA benefits from coming after C&C, it must be said. Nevertheless, one may remark that Tiberian Sun and Red Alert, although appearing after TA, did not reap immense rewards in this domain.

To put things plainly, in C&C if you send a group of troops to a location, they can be shredded to pieces by defensive fire before getting there, since they have seemingly no ability to return fire, or avoid the killing range. If the player does not follow his troops, nurturing them and pampering their way, he can wind up with precious little to attack with when the time comes.

TA puts the term Artificial Intelligence under a whole new light. Your troops seem to have a will of their own when it comes to reacting on the battlefield. They will automatically engage the enemy, whether moving or not, unless you specifically forbid them to. They appear to evaluate the enemy strength and respond accordingly. It is a real pleasure to see you units at work, even when they're loosing.

Animations

TA has a normal range of animations you could expect to see on mechanized units. Radar dishes turn, aerial fighters do loops, lights blink. But the most remarkable aspect of the animations are the explosions. Never before have you seen such variety and beauty in the destruction of units. Flashes of light followed by clouds of smoke are sometimes accompanied by billowing ejections of pieces from the defunct unit (check out the Explosion Museum). In short, there has never been such a precise modelling of mayhem. It seems that the developers take into account the size of the unit, the type of weapon killing it, and how the damage occurs. A basic infantry unit being killed by another infantry unit (low-power energy weapon) will produce a brief <bang> and some smoke. A Colossus being slaughtered by a Mauler's heavy lasers will burst into tens of flaming wreakage, sending pieces miles high (well, rather high).

C&C has a comparable range of troop actions. After all, humans are easy to imitate since there are models of them all over the world. On the other hand, it would be difficult to imagine a soldier dying in a vast explosion of flaming wreakage - they do have a tendancy of rather just dropping dead - with or without a pool of blood to mark the spot. So it is obvious that TA benefits from the decidedly robotic approach of the whole thing.

Missions

It has been a while since I've finished C&C, so I will not get into paticulars. I remember that the terrain was agreably varied and the tactical elements were indeed present, even though the use of hiding behind trees or clumps of rock was questionable at best. Units have a marked tendancy of "seeing" whatever comes into their range of sight, whether there is an obstacle in the way or not.

TA units are very definitely subject to terrain. A unit hiding behind a hill does indeed hide (trees are irrelevant here, since all but the smallest units are six meters high) and can only be targeted by radar if direct line-of-sight is not available (and it is not from the other side of the hill). Units below water are very rarely subject to surface damage, and mountains or other natural obstacles protect efficiently from splash damage from heavy weapons (think nukes).

On the other hand, after dozens of hours of gameplay, one must admit that map variety is not extremely useful in TA. Although present, the tactical importance of a map is relevant only in the broad lines (is there water, only water or no water ?). In the specifics, once you know the choice of units you have, you enter a specific type of battle possibilities. After that, the tactical niceties of having a cluster of islands here or there is of limited strategic interest.

Conclusion

In short, TA still holds its own after almost four years of new titles. Granted, many of the "new" titles never even tried to do more, and more still were utter failures as soon as they hit the shelves (Force Commander, anyone ?). But some of the competition did have an edge, even though I still wait for the RTS game that will make me shelve my TA CDs. All in all, Cavedog deserves recognition for having created lasting quality.

All images here are taken from in-game screenshots. Total Annihilation is installed with both Core Contingency and Strategic Battle expansion packs, as well as TA Unit Independancy Pack.