War/Starcraft?

[Bozos of Bones]

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

[Xen]

Originally posted by Bozos of Bones: 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!

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

[GokuZool]

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 ]

[Assassin]

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.

[Dundee Slaytern]

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 FFFFFF">DSlaytern. You should be able to find me playing with my friend, Bluemilk.

[Mack_Attack]

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

[Sigmar]

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

[The Fallen One]

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)

[SecretMaster]

Originally posted by Assassin: 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.

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.

[CerebroDragon]

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?

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!