I was thinkhing about getting one(or both) of these old but good strategies...again. Wich one do you recommend?

<font face="Verdana" size="3" color="#00FF00">Never played War but Star Craft is a great multiplayer game and the 3 single player campaigns are great, has some of the best cinematic sequences in any game, and tells a great story. Get the kit with expansion and extra campaigns.</font>

[ 09-23-2003, 03:46 PM: Message edited by: pritchke ]

Starcraft is the best, though both got style.

Starcraft is a sheer genius gameplay-wise. All three factions are very different, but still quite balanced and there is no "cookie cutter" strategy that is obviously better than anything else.

Also I think Starcraft has a more interesting storyline where alliances shift and you are not always sure who are the good guys.

To Starcraft again!...I guess

Thnaks!

Startcraft is a good game. if you are really good with it you can become a professional Starcraft player ( people will actually sponsor you )and join the Starcraft tournament that is held in South Korea. I heard that the prizes is quite good.

<font color=lightgreen.
People in Korea see War/Starcraft tournaments as nice entertainment. They watch the games played as a family and then the results are broadcasted on TV! Weird huh?
</font>

The pinnacle moment of my life is when I got the sattelite dish, and i was adjusting it. I cought the GameTour TV, and a StarCraft match between Bato and Yiowhan was on. Bato is a Croat, I know him, I've played against him(3 vs 2) and he plays like . . . unexplainable.
As for the question, I reccomend Starcraft. It's got an excellent storyline, perfect balance, great multiplayer...

"You must go into this with both eyes open. Once started, there's no going back.
Are you prepared to go all the way?"
-Admiral Gerard DuGalle, UED flagship Alexander, Brood Wars

Starcraft i still play online a lot if you buy it look me up my names Cloudy_Killer.

If you ever run into someone that goes by the name The_Regicide, you know whi it is(me). I just got StarCraft, AGAIN! C U ON BTTLNET!

all this is making me want to buy Starcraft, if i wasn't saving up my money i would, is it that great?

No, it's not that great. It's better. I just went to my local software shop and bought it for $15.95. Going to play on Battle-net today. I'm so excited. It's been over a year now since I last played it. I hope I can get someone.
If any of you buys StarCraft, or already has it, please tell me your nick.
The_Regicide

OK! I will buy it and we can arrange something. I will PM you!

I have both Starcraft and Warcraft II; they're both great games, but I prefer Warcraft.

My tip:

Buy Warcraft III. ;)

[ 09-25-2003, 09:07 PM: Message edited by: GokuZool ]

Bah. I have a huge rant against Warcraft 3. I dislike it. I have tried it, and it sucked. Every single game is the exact same, because of the ways that Blizzard decided to 'simplify' the game in order to make it more appealing to a larger audience. They follow the exact same build order, creep the exact same time, rush at exactly the same moment.

The problem is that for more competitive players (above recreational/pubbies), those 'little changes' that Blizzard made are what separate good players from great players. The ability to balance economy with an army is one thing that lacks in Warcraft 3. You build 5 peons, and that's it. Maximum efficiency right there. You need to build more than 16 poens in Starcraft. Sure, it may sound easy, but if you don't keep building them, then the opponent will get ahead in the resource war, and in that war, unless you shorten the gap, the game will be over shortly.

Casting spells. Why Blizzard made auto-cast is beyond me. The computer does your work for you! In Starcraft, the difference was that the good players could get off maybe 2 good storms in a given time frame. Great players could get off 3, and that usually made all of the difference in the world. In Warcraft 3, you turn on Bloodlust, then, 10 seconds later, you turn on Lightning Shield. The computer does the work for you. Sure, there's some similarities with the Medic's Heal ability, but come on...

Upgrades. Have you ever seen the speed of Warcraft 3 upgrades? I have, and I was shocked at the speed. You stall the enemy for 10 minutes, and you go from 0/0 to 3/3. In Starcraft, you need to plan your upgrades properly, and execute it properly. If you're behind on upgrades, you better get moving fast, because upgrades count a lot.

Army size. Along this thread is the health of the units. You have a small army with huge amounts of life. Now, compare that to a huge army with small (relative) amounts of life. Which one requires more micro? Doesn't micro separate the levels of skill among players?

Sure, it's meant to be more newbie friendly, but I think that they oversimplified the game. You need some variables here and there that show your skill. I mean, after a certain skill point, the games that you play are the exact same. You do the exact same stuff the exact same way over and over again.

Noooo! My old account is dead! Sniff... RIP, Skane. Ah well, just made a new account. If anybody wishes to challenge or co-op with me, look for <span style="color:#FFFFFF">DSlaytern. You should be able to find me playing with my friend, Bluemilk.

Warcraft III all the way and then get the expansion when you get bored of warcraft III. It is the best game out there. :D

I prefer Starcrat to Warcraft 3, but the latter is definately the looker of the bunch :D . Arrrrr.

Warcraft is a great game and starcraft is also one. I think what u wanna get depends more on what kind of setting u like...sword and spears or guns and beams :). I prefer swords (mediaval setting) so i prefer warcraft over starcraft( doesnt meant that warcraft is better tho)

I will have to disagree with you on some points (depending if you have The Frozen Throne). About your army size& health issue, you can easily balance that out with armor types. All tier 3 units (the big bad ones) generally have Heavy armor. Heavy armor is weak against piercing, so if you have some ranged units, you can easily conquer those baddies. You can also change the tides of battle with hero abilities, spells, smart combat tactics.

The expansion now has made all upgrades longer, meaning it takes a long time to go from town hall to keep, to castle etc. Blizzard realized everyone advanced way to quickly.

As for spells, I can kind of agree with you on that, but its mainly meant as a timekiller. Its so hard normally to click every individual spellcaster, click the spell, select a target, repeat.

For your maximum efficiency, I'll tell you right now 5 peons won't cut it for gold. For an intense and good battle to supply your army and build one, you can't rely on one gold mine. Two is more like it. Then you need lots of peasants for lumber, because lumber comes in small quanities, long time, and almost everything good requires 50 lumber, level 3 upgrades can reach up to 225 lumber! Upkeep is the main reason why you can't support an army on one gold mine. Sure in the beginning its easy, but when you have an enormous army, your only getting 4 gold instead of 10, which makes a huge difference.

But the expansion changed a lot, but I can still see your beef with the game, I see it too, and I'll admit somethings are oversimplified.

As for the original question, Warcraft II & III are the only ones I have.

Interesting that whilst the original thread question seemed to refer to Starcraft and Warcraft II, quite a few have decided to mention Warcraft III instead. Hmm. I often wonder how many gamers are keen to talk only about the latest' stuff blindly ignoring the past and what's gone before. Oh well. I'll do my best not to gripe too much. ;)

I thoroughly reccomend Warcraft II Battle Net Edition, which contains both the brilliant original game and the expansion, beyond the dark portal.
I enjoyed Warcraft II alot more than the derivative (warlords battlecry anyone?) Disney-esque (where's the gore and eerieness from the original?) Warcraft III, which I was quite disappointed with. Being forced to play humans from the start as opposed to the original two where you actually had a choice between orcies and humans got it off to a very unfortunate start.
Lucky the cinematics were good - however, they don't make the game now, do they? :D

My friends and I have been having quite a few Warcraft II BNE sessions of late and its been great fun. It represents for me the sweetspot in RTS games with C&C and Red Alert. And the music is perfectly suitable and so memorable!
Thus, I really reccomend it!

:( I don't have the game, but I played the expansion at my cousin's house, and with using just one upgrading facility using Night Elves, I was able to finish every single upgrade there very quickly. I know that 5 peons won't cut it for gold. However, in Starcraft, you have expansion too, you know. It takes a lot more concentration to built 38 SCV's (32 for minerals, and 6 for gas), then it does to build 16-18 peons (10 for gold, and 6-8 for wood). I know that those numbers are approximate (you'll probably have more in SC for minerals if you have one expo, and you *might* have more for wood in WC3), but that's what it's like.

I have played both of the games (warcraft III and starcraft and even warcraft ii), and I would recommend all of them since all of them are good games.

WARCRAFT!!!!

dundee is the challenge for starcraft or warcraft? If its for warcraft then il be on. Il play with/against u! I love the co-op missions, i had to stop playing for a while because i got really addicted and played for hours on them every night.

Correct me if wrong but i think he was talking about Starcraft. PM him...

I can't speak for WC3, but WC2 and SC are (were) great games. I can class myself in Guru level for both, happily (Warcraft Brag: Garden of War, 7 enemies. Starcraft Brag (before expansion): Completely fair custom scenario, 7 enemies, 0 kills, 0 razings), so I know what I'm talking about.

Although both games are worth your money, I would still definitely give the edge to Starcraft, since the fact that Warcraft's Orcs and Humans were almost literally identical cut down a hell of a lot on the replay factor. When the only differences are that Paladins have better spells than Ogre-Magi, and the Humans don't have Death Coil, it kinda sucks having 2 sides that are so damn equal. The game also had a few other flaws, such as the inability to repair Ships/Catapults/Ballistae, and the fact that the Griffons/Dragons were essentially worthless.

When you play Warcraft, you learn the Human tech tree, and then discover that the Orc tech tree is just the same. When I got Starcraft, though, I experienced what can only be called "culture shock:" Learning Terran was familiar enough (especially to a Warcraft veteran), but I was simply <u>stunned</u> when I got to the Zerg campaign. ("You want me to send my Farm to go scout out the enemy? And then, I'm supposed to tell my guys to climb into my Farm, and it will carry them across the sea? What the HELL???")

In short, I have nothing but praise for Starcraft's threefold complexity. Each race is completely different, yet very well balanced, and the manifold layering of strategies means that you can go for months without learning all the tricks. I thought I'd seen it all when I found out that EMP Shockwave depletes Protoss shields....but then I figured out how to drop a nuke without leaving the red dot. :D

Computer or Human? ;) If the former, meh. If the latter, I bow to you. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Funny... I seem to recall that Orcs were vastly popular because it was far easier to cast Bloodlust than Heal(on like... 64 units(your units) in the midst of battle). IMHO, Orcs have the better spells, although I think the Humans were cooler-looking. Pity looks account for nothing on the battlefield.

You also obviously never suffered the horror that is known as the Bloodlusted+Hasted Dragons. :D

Old news(I can do it without using air units too). ;) I agree though, one can still learn new things in Starcraft. My friend just learned the 2 minute Zergling Rush(meaning, they're in your base by the 2nd minute(GAME TIME)) just the other day.

[ 10-04-2003, 12:04 AM: Message edited by: Dundee Slaytern ]

*cough* 4-pool? *cough* Meh. I've learnt most of the tricks in Starcraft, I just can't seem to do them. I can macro, but not micro. Ah well. However, can you lockdown 12 floating BC's with 12 Ghosts? I've tried, and I could only get 6. :(

As to the threefold complexity of STarcraft- yes, it is very complex, however, the fact that you have all of those different units makes it harder to balance than something that has all of the units similar. Kudos to Blizzard, though, for making the game more balanced than many a game that has all of same units, just with different names.

Keyboard shortcuts are your friends. :D

Right, but you still have to try to get every individual Ghost on a different BC, and when they're all mushed together...

Your Ghost can Cloak and Lockdown twice each. Lockdowned Battlecruisers do not move, so only the active ones continue to advance forward. Tis a simple matter of divide and conquer. Besides... unless he has Medics or is feeling suicidal, most sane players will choose to retreat at this point.

There are people who use Battlecruisers without Medics versus Terran? Seriously, I have yet to see a decent player go Battlecruisers, and not have quite a bit of SV's, Medics, and SCV's for support.

*shrug*

Never lost a battle yet against a BC player when I am Terran(or any race for that matter). I personally never found it that difficult to micro the "spellcasting".

Well, I've never really faced a BC player lately. When are you on, Dundee? I feel the need to play a bit of Starcraft. I mean, everything else is getting a tad stale, so I'm going back to the games that I've neglected for the last half year or so. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Seriously, I'd be interested on how badly I'll lose. I'd rate my game against personal friends from real-life, on a scale from 1-10, about a 6 or 7. Against random Bnet people, it drops down to about a 4-5, which means that I get wasted a lot. =/ I know the theory, but I can't seem to adapt it to situations. Ah well.

I log on at night. About 8 hours from the time of this post.

=/ Seeing as we're about 12 hours different for time zones, I don't think that it'll be possible... Ah well, back to playing random pubbies...

i'd recommend all... ;)

Warcraft III is a BIG game in my opinion.. with so many options, you have to have auto-cast... but then I get your point assassin... ;)

The expansion made it very complicated compared to Reign of Chaos... it allowed rushes because of cheap units, and they made the upgrades expensive... and it would force those good players to expand... i love warcraft iii with Frozen Throne... before that... ahh... I think I'll side with you... :D

back to the topic... Starcraft was wow... Zerg forever.. hehe try all... the first game I played was Warcraft II in the mac... amazing game... :D

Having played them all, I must say that that the original Warcraft is the best of the bunch [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[ 10-26-2003, 04:40 PM: Message edited by: Dreamer128 ]

Would everybody agree with me that I should have just bought Warcraft II or Starcraft instead of Dungeon Siege? LOL [img]smile.gif[/img]

Dungeon Siege has its' charms. [img]smile.gif[/img] I would not consider it a bad buy.

hmm.. well you have a point... but what if you didn't have the money... you know... you can only buy either one... [img]smile.gif[/img]