When comparing Cube 2: Sauerbraten vs Warzone 2100, the Slant community recommends Warzone 2100 for most people. In the question“What are the best open-source games?” Warzone 2100 is ranked 12th while Cube 2: Sauerbraten is ranked 42nd. The most important reason people chose Warzone 2100 is:
Although it can be confusing to get the tech you want at times, Warzone has a complete tech tree that ranges from vertical take-off and landing crafts to laser guns and missile launching cyborgs, and includes four hundred different techs and upgrades.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Simple gameplay
There are no skills beyond those common to all AFPS games: very basic movement, aim, weapon switching, item timing, map knowledge. There is less to learn so newbies can become proficient more quickly, but there is still the ability to hone those basic skills to a very high level, as evidenced by regular community tournaments.
Pro Fast movement
Movement is very simple but acceleration is very fast, so hitting an opponent good at dodging is more difficult than perhaps any other AFPS.
Pro Cross platform
Available for Windows, MacOS and Linux.
Pro Free, open-source
Pro Low hardware requirements
If you can run the original Quake 3 you can probably run this (with the advanced graphics features disabled).
Pro Easy map editing
Getting into map editing is very easy, which has resulted in a large number of user-created maps with a wide variety, from massive sky castles where you have to hunt down your opponent from far away, to large CTF maps, to competitive, claustrophobic 1v1 arenas with teleports.
Pro Many gametypes and gametype combinations
Free-For-All (everyone for themselves, all weapons allowed), Capture (where teams fight for control of points on the map), Capture the Flag (two teams fight to capture the other's flag and return it to their base), Teamplay (defeat the other team's players to score points for your team), Tactics (FFA, no weapon pickups, players spawn with random equipment), Efficiency (FFA, no weapon pickups, players spawn with all equipment) InstaHold, where two teams have to possess a single flag for a minimum of 20 seconds to score points; Collect (kill enemy players and collect their skulls, which then have to be returned to the home base), and Protect (teams try to touch each other's flag). Instagib, regenerative weapons ("regen") and Teamplay versions of most of the game modes are available, as well as online cooperative map editing—one of Cube 2's most interesting and popular features.
Pro Has a Doom-like singleplayer campaign
Pro Big tech tree
Although it can be confusing to get the tech you want at times, Warzone has a complete tech tree that ranges from vertical take-off and landing crafts to laser guns and missile launching cyborgs, and includes four hundred different techs and upgrades.
Pro Custom unit assembling
The game permits you to research vehicle tech under three main forms, weapons, chassis, and locomotion. The player must then assemble their own design, from the tech they have discovered. This permits a wide range of customizability in units.
Pro Big game scale
Although there is a limit to a number of units, Warzone permits pretty massive armies.
Pro Open source
It's free so you can't lose anything if you don't like it and anyone can help in the development by taking the sources of the game.
Cons
Con Simple graphics
For the most part it looks like a game from the early 2000s. There are advanced options that use a lot more GPU power, but inefficiently compared to modern games, and many competitive players turn these off in favour of visual clarity and a really high framerate.
Con Simple gameplay
The gameplay is more basic than almost all other AFPS games. Movement doesn't get any more advanced than recoil/rocket jumping, without even crouching or bunnyhopping. This is great for newbies and for becoming competent quickly but for experienced AFPS players getting around the map is less interesting and there are less skills to work on - just the basics of aiming, weapon selection, item timing, and map knowledge.
Con Units stay stuck everywhere
It's like there is sticky glue on everything, units just hit things and stay stuck. This creates bottlenecks in armies, and often impedes on army mobility and reliability.
Con Must micromanage, despite the fact commanders should avoid that
On the other hand, they do avoid a lot of micromanagement if the land is easy enough.