Starcraft

Seriously though, the strategy required in Starcraft is mad. Micromanagement in any other game still can't come close. 3 marines and a science vessel taking out a lurker isn't something anyone can do.
 
mrbay said:
Seriously though, the strategy required in Starcraft is mad. Micromanagement in any other game still can't come close. 3 marines and a science vessel taking out a medic isn't something anyone can do.
Click to expand...
Err...medics have no attack. :confused:
 
aznpxdd said:
SC is truely one of the best games ever, and arguably the best RTS ever. Sometimes I really wonder how the hell Blizzard got the game so balanced yet with so much variety between the three races.

If you like SC/BW, definitely try out Warcraft 2 and Warcraft 3 with Frozen throne.

IMO, TA just doesn't have the same lasting power as SC. I mean, there has to be a reason why StarCraft is considered a national sport in Korea. People there gets paid to practice and compete in tournaments for money. Its one of the first game to really start the "cyber athlete" thing.
Click to expand...

This is very true. While I was initially a TA fan/player--heck I even got on the "look how shitty SC's graphics are (in comparison to TA's)" bandwagon...until I played on BNet for the first time. A few months after TA started collecting dust on the shelf, and now I mostly use the CDs for the awesome soundtrack.

It's not to say that TA isn't as good...but it just wasn't as FUN. I seem to experience a "SC revival" every year at college. Freshmen year some high school friends start trash talking, and we play SC. Sophmore year I get back into D2 again, so not so much sc...Junior year during midterms and finals, I start playing SC again. And finally my senior year, I start playing, AGAIN, b/c someone mentions minerals and the first thing we can think of is starcraft (not chemistry).
 
mrbay said:
Seriously though, the strategy required in Starcraft is mad. Micromanagement in any other game still can't come close. 3 marines and a science vessel taking out a lurker isn't something anyone can do.
Click to expand...

Hehe, has someone been watching Boxer's 'no tanks, only vessels' replay against a Zerg player? He literally has 10-12 sci vessels flying around at the end.
 
Naw, I watched that one too though. This one was from a the top 10 2005 replays under "marine shock squadron".

Oh yeah, and SlayerS`BoxeR is god.
 
I am hopelessly addicted to Warcraft3 TFT. I play almost every day. My two partners in my clan make for a pretty lethal blitzkrieg 3v3 team. We're just waiting for one of them to upgrade his pathetic Pentium 2 so he stops dropping (he's suprisingly good at Microing ranged units with that old POS, but if the game gets going and more and more units come on the screen it chokes on its own vomit :D )
 
Don't lie. Warcraft III is impossible to run on P II. Look at the minimum requirements.
 
aznpxdd said:
IMO, TA just doesn't have the same lasting power as SC. I mean, there has to be a reason why StarCraft is considered a national sport in Korea. People there gets paid to practice and compete in tournaments for money. Its one of the first game to really start the "cyber athlete" thing.
Click to expand...

To be honest, I think the reason TA doesn't have the same popularity as SC is because it's harder. The game requires a lot more thought and skill to play well. I got bored with playing SC online fairly quickly because it seemed like every game was won either by some gimmick or superior knowledge of the map and knowing how to grab all the resources early. I never once lost a game to someone who was able to field a superior army...it was all rush tactics and stunts.

Why I play TA almost ten years later, but not SC:

SC: sprite graphics and cartoonish terrain
TA: 3D units and realistic terrain

SC: Maps are limited to a handful of terrain altitudes, generated from a tileset. These are largely inconsequential except in creating bottlenecks for unit movement.
TA: Maps can be made virtually any way you can imagine. Terrain affects unit movement and firing range. Terrain can also be used as a shield; for example, units on high ridges may be able to fire down on enemies, but shots fired at them hit the ridge.

SC: only a certain number of units can be selected (<20, iirc)
TA: you can build up to 250 units and select them all

SC: No matter what your units do, once a weapons is fired at them, it will hit them
TA: unless a weapon is guided, evasive actions are effective; not every shot is a guaranteed hit

SC: You can queue 5 units to be built per building.
TA: You can queue 99 units to be built per building.

SC: Air units behave like ground units, only without terrain effects.
TA: Air unit behave like...well...air units. They fly instead of hover (usually).

I don't intend to turn this into a flamefest, so don't take it personally. I used to really enjoy StarCraft, but it got old to me--especially when I started playing online. Playing TA online has always been a much more entertaining experience to me, and I think the game got overlooked in favor of more palatable, easier-to-master games like SC and C&C.
 
the AI for the aircraft in TA was also way superior to anything of its time, as well as in the near future

still to this day, the aircraft and their maneuverability are still aw-inspiring
 
Starcraft has been the only RTS ive ever been able to get addicted to up until recently when lord of the rings battle for middle earth 2 came out. Love the movies, and the game play is simple yet can get complex. havent tried online but got my arse whipped at a couple lan parties. Check out the demo here. Im suprised no one else has mentioned it.
 
PopeKevinI said:
SC: only a certain number of units can be selected (<20, iirc)
TA: you can build up to 250 units and select them all
Click to expand...

Well, if you can't even remember the exact # you can select, it's a fair assumption that you didn't really give SC a chance.

And that number is 12 units.

One game review said that TA is almost "too medical" for most gamers (and certainly for casual gamers). I still agree with that, and I'm hoping that Supreme Commander turns out to be less so.
 
Starcraft is way harder to play well than TA, thats why theres so many tournaments for it.

i play starcraft tons on ranked ladders and tournaments and such.
 
SC was the only RTS game I ever finish. I remember the countless hours playing on battle.net. I still haven't finished WC3.
 
Mav451 said:
Well, if you can't even remember the exact # you can select, it's a fair assumption that you didn't really give SC a chance.

And that number is 12 units.

One game review said that TA is almost "too medical" for most gamers (and certainly for casual gamers). I still agree with that, and I'm hoping that Supreme Commander turns out to be less so.
Click to expand...


Noo... if they turn Supreme Commander into Starcraft, I will be mightily pissed. TA was fun because it was medical, the fights relied more on tactics than on gathering resources.

If anything, Supreme Commander could use a nice single player mode that teaches players how to become good for online play. Have missions that introduce certain tactics instead of "here's a map, defeat your enemy" which always leads to "Build max amount of biggest units, zerg"

I'd like to see a mission where any uncloaked units are instantly attacked with surgical precision. A mission where you're cut off from your commander and can't build and are given X amounts of units (like Myth)
 
Starcraft is way harder to play well than TA, thats why theres so many tournaments for it.
Click to expand...

no its not way harder to play, infact its way easier to play, one of the key factors in SC's popularity was it was so easy to adapt to, not to mention the AI in the game was extremely retarded, almost as bad as the AI in C&C: RA

Noo... if they turn Supreme Commander into Starcraft, I will be mightily pissed. TA was fun because it was medical, the fights relied more on tactics than on gathering resources.
Click to expand...

i agree, the more units the better, the bigger the battle field the better, the more battles the better, the more dynamic units the better, i want what TA was back then, a massively awsome RTS game i couldn't put down and had alot of fun with strategies.

Well, if you can't even remember the exact # you can select, it's a fair assumption that you didn't really give SC a chance.
Click to expand...

err... how do you figure? its an old game, he probably hasn't play it in a long time, if he said he didn't enjoy it, you think he'd bother trying to remember how many units he can select?
 
SC is easy to pick up, but it is WAY deeper than most people think. That's the beauty of SC, it is easy enough that a complete newbie can pick it up and have fun right away. But on the other hand, it is very deep and complex if someone wants to compete at a professional level. I've watched pro gamers use numerous creative tatics to overcome their opponents.

I'm not trying to start a flamefest, but I've heard a lot of people (some here) talk about the greatness of TA, but yet, do any of you guys REALLY still play it? SC on the other hand, is still played by thousands of player on Battle net daily even after close to 9 years and in Korea, there are still a lot of tournaments for it. I myself still play the game weekly with friends.
 
aznpxdd said:
SC is easy to pick up, but it is WAY deeper than most people think. That's the beauty of SC, it is easy enough that a complete newbie can pick it up and have fun right away. But on the other hand, it is very deep and complex if someone wants to compete at a professional level. I've watched pro gamers use numerous creative tatics to overcome their opponents.

I'm not trying to start a flamefest, but I've a lot of people (some here) talk about the greatness of TA, but yet, do any of you guys REALLY still play it? SC on the other hand, is still played by thousands of player on Battle net daily even after close to 9 years and in Korea, there are still a lot of tournaments for it. I myself still play the game weekly with friends.
Click to expand...



exactly
 
Trimlock said:
err... how do you figure? its an old game, he probably hasn't play it in a long time, if he said he didn't enjoy it, you think he'd bother trying to remember how many units he can select?
Click to expand...

Trim - I was trying to emphasize the fact that he didn't even play it long enough to understand it. It is like me getting Flash/Instigator rushed in TA and me complaining that TA is a rush fest (which it obviously isn't and would be a gross generalization).

I'm just saying that if he didn't even give the game a chance, how can he know enough to JUDGE it? Cuz frankly you can't.

I have played SC through middle/high/and college. TA? I only played the tail end of middle school. Some of its appeal, I'll admit, was that barely anyone I knew played it--kinda like appreciating underground vs. mainstream music.
 
aznpxdd said:
I'm not trying to start a flamefest, but I've heard a lot of people (some here) talk about the greatness of TA, but yet, do any of you guys REALLY still play it? SC on the other hand, is still played by thousands of player on Battle net daily even after close to 9 years and in Korea, there are still a lot of tournaments for it. I myself still play the game weekly with friends.
Click to expand...

I play it once in a while still, mostly by myself, as all my friends would rather play Star Craft or Dawn of War. Its kind of like comparing Final Fantasy with Daggerfall. They're both under the RPG genre, but they're vastly different games, one also has a much larger fan base as well. If I tell my friend "Hey, you need to try Morrowind, its an awesome RPG" they'll most likely say:

"But more people tell me FF is better, and my PC can't play Morrowind..."

Just like I'd rather play Raven Shield over Counter Strike... even though Counter Strike is a bajillion times more popular, I find RS more enjoyable.

Not to mention that TA came out around the same time Star Craft did, and everyone and their mother loved Warcraft and Diablo, so Blizzard already had an established name. Buying a Blizzard game back then was like buying a Lucas Arts game back then. You knew it was a gem. (because before Jedi Knight 2, I can't think of a single PC lucas arts game that didn't rock.) No one heard of Cavedog at the time, and the requirements for the game were much higher as well, and this was back in the days when processors were expensive, and ram was even more.

I was a huge fan of Warcraft 1/2. I used to play all the time over the modem or over a multinode BBS. I remember using Kali to play online as well. I did start playing TA before I picked up Star Craft, and I got used to the unit queueing, the automated resource gathering, the effect of terrain and wind on a battle. I guess those things spoiled me, as I was unable to play any game without those features until Age of Empires came along.

Single player wise though, SC was much more enjoyable, since it had... a story. :p
 
I played a lot of TA, and I played a lot of SC (and even wrote some early online strat guides for Terran players, waaaaay back). Both are very good games, but TA was overall the better game experience for me, and the one with the most replay value.

TA is still installed on my computer, SC hasn't been since like 2000.

I think one thing everyone overlooks when comparing the popularity of the two is BattleNet. It was vastly easier for people to find SC games online..once momentum gets generated in an online space, it's hard to overcome. The other aspect of Bnet was the ladder system, everyone could get ranked, and chasing a few rungs in the ladder is a good motivator for people to keep playing.

Another thing people overlook is the same low res 640x480 graphics that earned SC a lot of criticism made it accessable to the masses running less than state of the art PCs, so a Baang in Seoul with a lot of cheap computers and cheap monitors could still run SC just fine, and everyone who played was on a level playing field, which helped make it very popular with Koreans.

And lets not forget what Diablo did for Starcraft. Diablo sold like hotcakes, and on every CD was that cool Starcraft trailer movie...generating hype for Starcraft almost three years in advance.

I think the reason I personally like TA better than SC is the single player mode. While playing online is fun, for me a really fun RTS is one where a scenario/skirmish lasts HOURS and the outcome is not decided in the first two minutes of play..one where I can hit pause, go walk the dog, grab a sammich and get back to blowing stuff up at my leisure. But that's just me.
 
Mav451 said:
Well, if you can't even remember the exact # you can select, it's a fair assumption that you didn't really give SC a chance.
Click to expand...

Or it could be that I last played SC in 2000 :p
 
rise of nations is probably my second favorite rts, im too hesitant to say its better than starcraft after thinking of all the hours spent playing it (for years, whereas most games last months)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top