StarCraft!

[vmxa1]

Zero, why do you say Zerg is broken and what do you mean by it? Do you mean they are too strong or too weak?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Zero
Zerg = broken!!11!!!!!11!!!! w00t w00t!

I call BS.

[Zero]

broken usually means too good.

I say zergs are broken cause theyre my favorite race!!!!!!111!!!
YEAH!!!!11!!!!

Anyway fanboyism aside... okay zergs aren exact broke but Zergs are the best race hands down. Whether you're a BGH player or a ladder player.... (well i can see how zerg arent the best race in BGH cause one of their main strength becomes trivial in BGH games.. )

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Zero

Anyway fanboyism aside... okay zergs aren exact broke but Zergs are the best race hands down. Whether you're a BGH player or a ladder player.... (well i can see how zerg arent the best race in BGH cause one of their main strength becomes trivial in BGH games.. )

Ah, yes BGH. The other reason I don't play StarCraft anymore.


Why the **** do people only play ONE MAP? It's nearly impossible to find a regular game being played on anything but that stupid, shity, map.


I remember when it was first released, you could even find a decent number of alternate-ruled games like the one where players share control over a single side. But not anymore, it's all just BGH now.

[DinoDoc]

Yesd, I hate infinate money maps too. I especially hate people that play Protoss on them.

[Flip McWho]

Starcraft is a damn good RTS. Best one ever.
Loved the storyline. Don't play online at all so don't know it. Haven't played SC in ages. You guys are making me nostaglic. Damn I wish I had my SC cd now. That woulda been my christmas day.
Oh Merry Christmas everyone it is now 12:45am on christmas day in little old NZ.

[Az]

Starcraft is a damn good RTS. Best one ever.

Nope.

[Skanky Burns]

Well, with a refutation that thorough, who could argue against your view-point?

[MattH]

Originally posted by Azazel

Quote:

Starcraft is a damn good RTS. Best one ever.

Nope.

Gotta love those one-word replies . If it isn't, what is?

[vmxa1]

It is in my top 5 list, I still found the original C&C and WarcraftII to be my favs in RTS.

[Az]

you have the original C&C, which is better, imho.

[General Ludd]

I'll never get what people find so appealing about C&C. It's so slow and boring. Generals: Zero Hour isthe only one that's even close to being good.

[Az]

slow and boring?

you mean, unlike ZERG RUSH~~!!!!!!!!!!1111111111111 ?

[vmxa1]

Well I think it is hard to appreciate a game this long after it came out. It is hard to measure up, same as old movies. They cannot be judge by todays standards.

When C&C came out it was one of the first RTS games and it was great fun. Would I like it today if I had never played it before, who knows. Some games do stand up.

My friend was 58 when he played his first game and it was Warcraft (last year). He was hooked. I gave him Moo and he loved it. I have given Moo to a number of coworkers over the years (people in thier 20-30's) and they like it.

So as I say who knows. C&C was good enough to get in the hall of fame in most game mags. Was Starcrft better, maybe. But when it came out it did not have the same impact on me. I would say it was a better design and great as well. I would not quarrel with picking either over the other.

You will have to admit Tanya was more fun than an archon.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Azazel
slow and boring?

you mean, unlike ZERG RUSH~~!!!!!!!!!!1111111111111 ?

I mean, sitting around while your ore collectors slowly putt their way way across the map and not even bring you back enough to make a single tank.

Or having so little variety in different units and tactics that every game is pretty much identical to the last.

[Footie Mad]

Looking at the korean pro-circuit there are top players primarily skilled in any of the three different races, watching a replay of the pros awes me. And yes it's one of the best games ever and I must have played 2000+ games on b.net.

[MattH]

To bad there are no new replays on b-net

[Zero]

Originally posted by Osweld


Ah, yes BGH. The other reason I don't play StarCraft anymore.


Why the **** do people only play ONE MAP? It's nearly impossible to find a regular game being played on anything but that stupid, shity, map.


I remember when it was first released, you could even find a decent number of alternate-ruled games like the one where players share control over a single side. But not anymore, it's all just BGH now.

what the f* are you talking about?

[L337]
STFU n00b!

PwNzEd!!!11!!!!!
[/L337]

no seriously, if you think sc is all BGH, then you havent really tried all of sc. There are PLENTY of ladder only players ya kno. Theres also PLENTY of scrubs that play custom games.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Azazel
you have the original C&C, which is better, imho.

original C&C is a horribly broken game. Westwood gave GDI everything and NOD nothing but the temple...... so gay so gay... Red Alert or Red alrt II is a much better game.

Westwood IMO has no idea how to make a balanced game in general. Their "patriotism" usually shows when Allies/US sides get all the ****.... and whenever terrorist or Soviets get broken **** it usually seems like it wasnt meant to be overpowered.

I used to play both westwood and blizzard RTS games very competitively. And nothing was as good as SC IMO. C&C series usually has better single player IMO, but really... who the hell even plays single player in RTS these days?

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Zero


no seriously, if you think sc is all BGH, then you havent really tried all of sc. There are PLENTY of ladder only players ya kno. Theres also PLENTY of scrubs that play custom games.

Exactly my point. Ladder, custom, or BGH.


When the **** did BGH become a game type? It's a MAP. I want to play normal games on maps which are actually interesting.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Osweld


Exactly my point. Ladder, custom, or BGH.

No it didnt sound like that to me at all.

Ah, yes BGH. The other reason I don't play StarCraft anymore.


Why the **** do people only play ONE MAP? It's nearly impossible to find a regular game being played on anything but that stupid, shity, map.

I remember when it was first released, you could even find a decent number of alternate-ruled games like the one where players share control over a single side. But not anymore, it's all just BGH now.

When the **** did BGH become a game type? It's a MAP. I want to play normal games on maps which are actually interesting.

i dont get what ur complaining about. Since you can play normal blizzard approved maps on Ladder and there are plenty of ppl still playing ladder. You actually BENEFIT by isolating the scrubs and n00bs away from ladder IMO.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Osweld


I mean, sitting around while your ore collectors slowly putt their way way across the map and not even bring you back enough to make a single tank.

Or having so little variety in different units and tactics that every game is pretty much identical to the last.

Doesnt sound much like you played the game in depth.

- To say Red Alert 1 is anything like Red alert 2 w. small unit/tactic difference is heresy. Game is so friggin different that even basic rifle infantry from 2 games has entirely different function and roles etc.

- Most games usually starts you out with 10,000 credit. That should be enough for you to build enough ore trucks and **** for you to not end up waiting every 5 min to build a damn tank. If so, you're playing the game wrong. (You should usally clear all the ore on map in less than 30 min if you're playing 1v1 large map in red alert 1)

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Zero


Doesnt sound much like you played the game in depth.

- To say Red Alert 1 is anything like Red alert 2 w. small unit/tactic difference is heresy. Game is so friggin different that even basic rifle infantry from 2 games has entirely different function and roles etc.

There's variation between different sequels of the game? Woo-wee!

i dont get what ur complaining about. Since you can play normal blizzard approved maps on Ladder and there are plenty of ppl still playing ladder. You actually BENEFIT by isolating the scrubs and n00bs away from ladder IMO.

I don't want to play ladder.

[Sava]

command and conquer is stupid

warcraft ii was great... but starcraft is KING OF THEM ALL!

command and conquer = guys shooting at each other, not hitting anything foir like 5 minutes, then one guy gets a little damaged.

I enjoyed the first C&C, but each successive release got DUMBER AND DUMBER

I stopped playing at Red Alert 2...

BTW, all the races in Starcraft are equally balanced. One race is not better than another. That's what makes it so great. For every dope that thinks ZERG OMFG l337 HAx)RS OMG... I could kick the **** outta them with humans or protoss... and likewise.

The funnest part of Starcraft was nuking... hands down... THE BEST!

[Az]

Originally posted by Osweld


I mean, sitting around while your ore collectors slowly putt their way way across the map and not even bring you back enough to make a single tank.

Or having so little variety in different units and tactics that every game is pretty much identical to the last.

You gotta be kidding. The variety in the games is large. Of course, there are units that are a must, but this is the same for Starcraft.

original C&C is a horribly broken game. Westwood gave GDI everything and NOD nothing but the temple...... so gay so gay... Red Alert or Red alrt II is a much better game.

It compensated by giving GDI NOTHING in Tiberian sun.

Seriously, Tiberian Sun is the least balanced game in the entire series. I don't like a single GDI unit. they're all crap.

The original C&C had NOD shine in multiplayer, like those StS missiles.

Still, NOD could hold it's ground. It required a more intelligent player than GDI's Mammoth mass production, but you could do some great stuff with artillery/ light tank. not to forget the harvester destruction brough by the stealth tanks.

Westwood IMO has no idea how to make a balanced game in general. Their "patriotism" usually shows when Allies/US sides get all the ****.... and whenever terrorist or Soviets get broken **** it usually seems like it wasnt meant to be overpowered.

I used to play both westwood and blizzard RTS games very competitively. And nothing was as good as SC IMO. C&C series usually has better single player IMO, but really... who the hell even plays single player in RTS these days?

I do.


---------------------------------------------------------


This reminds me: I want to get my hands on the original C&C. it's nowhere to be seen, apparently. I miss the Abrams tanks.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Sava

BTW, all the races in Starcraft are equally balanced. One race is not better than another. That's what makes it so great. For every dope that thinks ZERG OMFG l337 HAx)RS OMG... I could kick the **** outta them with humans or protoss... and likewise.

People say supposedly the game is SUPPOSED to work in a Zerg > Protoss > Terran > Zerg RPS system.

Zerg >>>> Protoss. Protoss has to play keep up game agst zergs in the early game.
Zerg > or < terran. terran can play keep up, but there unit arent as diesel as protoss. Exception of firebats, zergs can rape during early build up phase.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Osweld

I don't want to play ladder.

[L337]
OMG OMG n00b!!!11!!! Why dont you just go kill yourself???//????

SO basically you're saying "I dont wanna play normal game" I wanna go suck some more BGH D***. HA!!!!!


PwNzEd!!111!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (OmG OMG)
[/L337]

[Zero]

Originally posted by Azazel

Still, NOD could hold it's ground. It required a more intelligent player than GDI's Mammoth mass production, but you could do some great stuff with artillery/ light tank. not to forget the harvester destruction brough by the stealth tanks.

Yay! Stealth tanks! Nearly same damage as bikes, less armor than light tankies, but costs **** load of cash! True, I give you that stealth mode was nice, but Me thinks blitzing with recon bikes in mass was far more cost effective than wasting time sneaking in in that game.

And this game is so blatantly broke... GDI gets a war factory and NOD gets an airstrip. WTF? You buy a unit and its instant pop VS wait good 30 f*ing sec to get your unit. And cargo plane is f*ing vulnerable too. GDI can EASILY play ANTI VEHICLE GAME with 10 - 20 missle troops stationed in each possible angle.

WHACK!

Tiberian SUn was Gay too. Burrowing APC and cyborg commandos... pwnzed! Im not so sure of what to say about generals, but only red alert series is the only well balanced series IMO.

[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.

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...

plus, terrans have EMP against toss... so to say terrans are inferior to toss is wrong.

I've played every race using every strategy imaginable... I think there is a perfect, harmonious balance between the three.

[Az]

oh, you mean PROtoss. I was wondering there, for a while.

Yay! Stealth tanks! Nearly same damage as bikes, less armor than light tankies, but costs **** load of cash! True, I give you that stealth mode was nice, but Me thinks blitzing with recon bikes in mass was far more cost effective than wasting time sneaking in in that game.

Nah. not even close. Stealth tanks can ambush harvesters. Bikes are much worse at that,since you can send reinforcements, and ****.

I agree that NOD lacked muscle, but that only meant you had to use your brain slightly more, and not just mass Abrams' tanks, and MLRS.



And this game is so blatantly broke... GDI gets a war factory and NOD gets an airstrip. WTF? You buy a unit and its instant pop VS wait good 30 f*ing sec to get your unit. And cargo plane is f*ing vulnerable too. GDI can EASILY play ANTI VEHICLE GAME with 10 - 20 missle troops stationed in each possible angle.
[/q]