 |
| |
|
|
Puma
|
 |
Canada!!
Nov 2003
time: 05:32
|
|
The original C&C rocked, I wasted quite a few weekends on that thing. Red alert was boring, I even tried it out on the SNES, and then I just forgot about the whole thing.
Starcraft was good, but better with Brood War, and awesome once things got evened out with the patches.
The only problem I had was that the protoss were way too strong in the late game. With a good set of carriers and a terrain barrier of some kind - nothing could stand in their way. If you managed to invade their base, you'd have a hard time killing their buildings - too much shield - unless somehow you managed to keep your tank count low so as to carry more units during the invasion.
The reason BGH is still played so much I think is that younger players love the fact that they can bunker up/ cannon themselves in and then punch out with a flood of carriers/devourers&guardians. Plus they don't have to go after new resources all the time. Bah, no taste for adventure.
Everyone also loved the toss because they were so much easier to manage than terrans and zerg, but I enjoyed playing terrans. I still hated their damn tech tree. It was so spread, and you could not count on one branch alone to overpower opponents like you could do with mass carriers, mass lings/hydra, etc. Those damn ghosts also took too long to regenerate their damn energy. OMG how I hated that part. Those lockdows were too damn expensive. On the other hand I loved those medics.
I stopped playing when school started, and tried picking up the game again one summer; but I got pummelled by BGH players game after game - it was rather depressing  So I switched to use map settings games: cat and mice (before things got screwed with 1000 versions of it that made it too easy for the mice), and some insane version of starship troopers with music from the movie that drove one of my friends nuts. Those were fun times.
I don't think i'd play anyone anymore, somehow I have this feeling that I just suck at the game.
The original WC was awesome. I tried WC3, but it just wasn't the same, something about the game made it lame - I never even bothered to figure out what it was lol.
By the way, anyone here remember doom2? I wasted quite a few evenings on that one. We had a little apple network at school.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zero
|
 |
Bouncing back and forth
Sep 2002
time: 00:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sava
I dunno zero... beyond a quick zergling rush, protoss can cannon up and be formidable foes... it depends what type of units you focus on. Carriers with an arbiter can decimate anything.
|
for most strat talk, i was referring to Ladder games, so no. Carriers will never come out. Even if you teched to carriers, carriers suck so badly in ladder games.
quote:
plus, terrans have EMP against toss... so to say terrans are inferior to toss is wrong. |
All races have all anti(race) solutions. Terrans have neat things like emp agst toss, zergs have sweet ass unit like defiler agst terrans. But one example rarely makes the whole picture. And in general, Zerg > Pro > terr > zerg. There are seldom ppl who think Pro > zer > terr > pro, and they can make legitimate claims about it because people can judge things differently when theres so much variable in a game like this that has so much variety....
But Pro > Zer? thats crazy IMO.. (explanation under)
quote:
I dunno about that setup... any race can kick the **** out of any race. In fact, as a zerg, I usually like to fight terrans rather than Toss... |
Thats my favorite match up too. My friend used to be hardcore advocate of terrans. We used to battle out all the time. I  plaguing terran bases~ But I still think Terr has adv over zergs even though I can win 50-50 agst him.
but zerg clearly > protoss. Toss cant expand as nearly as well as zergs. And zergs get their power from expanding and inhibiting opponent from expanding. And pros will have extremly hard time keeping up with zerg production power......
quote:
I've played every race using every strategy imaginable... I think there is a perfect, harmonious balance between the three. |
There can never be a perfect balance in a game as complicated as this. Variety and attaining balance are at an inverse relationship to each other, meaning more variety game has, the harder it is to balance. To perfectly balance complicated game such as starcraft would not only be impossible, but also a waste of time. So yeah, there will always be imbalance that hardcore players will find and exploit. It's just that it would be really difficult and unclear as to how its imbalanced as game becomes more "balanced".
P.S. I dunno how recent patch will correct what i am saying though. I took a glimpse at all the balance changes and holy mother of god..... carrier/ultra/cruiser supply is now 4!!!!!???? Almost made me wanna install the game again to try out the new changes.
Last edited by Zero on 27-12-2003 at 06:52
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
JellyBean
|
|
Starcraft was the first RTS game I know of with three distinct [1], balanced sides. [2] Command & Conquer and Red Alert were a bit less certain in their balance [3], and the first two Warcraft games had sides identical apart from spells and a few minor upgrades. To be honest, I find the races in Warcraft 3 a bit too similar, particularly with the Frozen Throne expansion. For example, the night elves were noteworthy in the original version for not having a simple front-line tank - so, in the expansion, they gave them one, erasing another distinction between the races. I also think the game is a bit too complex - with seventeen heroes with four powers each, and about three spellcasters with three spells each per side, there are around a hundred different spells/abilities that you have to learn the effects of if you want to play competitively.
Lately, though, I've been enjoying Command & Conquer: Generals: Zero Hour. [4] The sides are about on par with Starcraft in terms of the difference between them, although the balance could still use some work. Some of the generals [5] are substantially underpowered, and see almost no use in multiplayer games. Still, there are enough reasonably strong generals to have a fun and varied game. It may not be quite as good as Starcraft, but since my friends refuse to play that anymore [6], it's good enough.
[1] I love the way that each race has a form of artillery so different in style to those of the others.
[2] I'll agree that there is a slight paper-scissors-stones imbalance as others have described, but it's narrow enough that the effect is swamped by either player skill or just plain chance.
[3] In the version 1.18 patch of Command & Conquer, the price of Nod turrets was increased from $250 to $600. This suggests that they were seriously imbalanced before the change, after it, or both.
[4] Game names with two colons in them should be taken out and shot.
[5] Variations on each of the sides, with some advantages and restrictions.
[6] (After I beat three of them.)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jethro83
|
|
Newcastle, Australia
Mar 2002
time: 15:32
|
|
Starcraft was indeed a classic and even maintains its place on the hard drive of my old computer. The only problem I have with it (also with Warcraft III and Blizzard in general) is the state Battle.net is in.
I just completely gave up on it. I go online to have a decent game, to have fun (of course win/lose is irrelevent to that so long as I had fun). Instead I see too many idiotic 14 year olds hurling verbal abuse and abusing a certain imbalance of a particular unit.
Age of Kings and Age of Mythology were much better to play online.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jethro83
|
|
Newcastle, Australia
Mar 2002
time: 15:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MattH
Are you kidding about AoK? Remember Castle Rush? Tower Rush? Town Hall Rush?
|
You're right that AoK still left room for cheap, abusive tactics like the tower rush. However, when I tried them for myself to try to "know the enemy" so to speak, I found the AoK rushes harder and more costly to pull off than Starcraft rushes. All it took was 50 minerals every few seconds playing as the zerg in Starcraft and the game was already decided.
Surely its harder to fight off the tier 1 grunt units of the enemy in Starcraft than it is to fight off a couple of villagers struggling to get a tower (or even a castle) built next to your town in AoK.
It wasn't perfect, but AoK was still better to play online than Starcraft.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Panzeh
|
|
That's the problem with RTS today. Too much emphasis on which units you use rather than how you use them.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zero
|
|
Bouncing back and forth
Sep 2002
time: 00:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by DrSpike
Essentially teching costs more wood now, |
Yeah I noticed I can tech reasonably if I abandon witch Docs. But then I wont have the benefit of heal ward...
quote:
and critically towers no longer have fortified armour to begin with, making teching more difficult.
Also since the ROC 1.06 patch casters deal magic damage and are unarmoured, which makes massing them a la 1.05 and before not a feasible strategy. |
What is the significance of type dmg vs type armor. I know there is a fortified is weak agst siege relationship, but what is the full picture. (is it like SC where they had R.P.S cycle for small med large size class)
quote:
In TFT a number of builds should be tried. The first is a 12 peon and barracks with third you queue up. Tech in early 20s foodwise and go SL for docs (or shams versus humans) when you hit tier 2. Other variants have 10 peons early on (you can get a barracks slightly earlier with this build) then add 2 more at tier 2. Then you can decide whether to go to tier 3 for tauren and tier 3 spells or pump more grunts, casters, hh at tier 2. |
This may be old strat, but my friend used to skip barracks when he wanted to tech early Is this still doable?
quote:
As far as teching builds go teching to straight casters is very uncommon now. But people do try heavy harass with FS or BM and tech to wyverns, and sometimes tauren. The 'standard' would be FS then grab a naga at tier 2 from the tavern. |
I noticed people like to tech to air units lot more now.
quote:
In the middle is an early tech then a delayed barracks as soon as you get the wood. This is quite popular since you have enough units to defend a mid game attack, and the speed of the teching allows a naga as quickly as the all out teching build. |
If you build a barrack at tier 2, you might get anothwer hero lot faster, but wouldnt it take longer time to build a force anyway?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DrSpike
|
 |
Enthusiastic member of Apolyton
Sep 2001
time: 05:32
|
|
Armour and attack types are crucial to understand. It changed significantly in ROC 1.06 also. Melee units have melee attack (well duh  ) and heavy armour. Melee attack does extra damage against ranged units, which all have medium armour. Ranged units do extra damage versus unarmoured units (casters), and to an extent against lightly armoured units. Lightly armoured units are usually air units. Casters (lower attack anyway now) have magic damage which performs well only really against heavy armour.
Towers now have heavy armour, which means they die much faster to an early attack. When they had fortified armour an orc could tech with 1 tower and burrows with no fear of being mashed.
Teching is still viable, just riskier than before. You need to successfully harass with no let up. I would add that teching is less attractive since the 1.06 armour/attack changes rendered mass casters ineffective.......so what are you teching to now that casters are support units? It is possible to go mass air, or some air then tauren, but remember the counters are stronger now, so mass air is risky. Tauren are tier 3, and that means you have to survive a long time.
To start I recommend the 12 peon build, which gives you 5 grunts before you reach tier 2. You should also try the delayed barracks build, which gives you 2/3 grunts by the time you reach tier 2. Remember that grunts cost only gold........if you tech as early as poss (ie when you get the wood) then build barracks when you get 50 wood after that, then you have enough resources to keep kicking grunts until tier 2 arrives.
Personally I usually do the first build, since I prefer a couple more grunts to an early tier 2.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32.
Apolyton Time is 00:32. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-12-2003 14:25
I need to learn more
|