
|
The Faithful Knights of Christ > General Discussion > WarCraft III? |
|
| << Prev Topic | Next Topic >> |
| Author |
Comment
|
|||
![]() Posts: 1259 (2/20/04 12:39 am) Reply |
WarCraft III? Anyone playing WarCraft 3? On Battle.net? Eric |
|||
DvLang ![]() ![]() Posts: 415 (2/20/04 4:03 pm) Reply |
Re: WarCraft III?
Sorry Kaze... I played the single player. But never got into the multiplayer system.
|
|||
|
JonGCR
Private Posts: 10 (2/21/04 11:55 am) Reply |
Warcraft III I have that and frozen throne but I only play frozen throne online every once in awhile. SN is tasteslikechiba (i'm on useast btw) |
|||
![]() Posts: 1260 (2/22/04 1:10 pm) Reply |
Re: Warcraft III How come? Is the multi-player mode not as fun as StarCraft was? I haven't bought it, and am wondering if the multi-player mode and the campaign editor will be as good as StarCraft's is. Eric |
|||
|
JonGCR
Private Posts: 11 (2/24/04 3:55 pm) Reply |
Re: Warcraft III Meh, Warcraft III is a whole lot different than SC game play wise. Warcraft3 revolves around heroes and micro management while SC/BW revolves around macro(send your units into a battle, usually a lot, but don't follow each units actions). It is still enjoyable but the learning curve is very steep. It doesn't help that the 'ladder system' doesn't work to well. It tries to match you with people you're experience level but many people make 'smurf' accounts. Which means they have, for instance, a lvl 22 account but they make a new account (which starts at lvl1) to perfect their record. But if you work at it/just play with friends in custom games, it can be very fun |
|||
|
SirNukes
Cow Master Posts: 2267 (2/26/04 11:40 am) Reply |
Re: Warcraft III In defense of Starcraft, there is tons of micro. A lot of people never bothered to develop it, though, and so don't realize it was there. If you check out the replays of games between great players, you'll find that they are considered good (and win games) because they are awsome at micro. I was a very good player myself in comparison to the bnet public mainly because I knew how to micro, giving me a serious edge. If you want to say War3 stresses micro more, sure, but sc does not revolve around macro. -Brent |
|||
|
JonGCR
Private Posts: 14 (2/26/04 3:19 pm) Reply |
Re: Warcraft III That's true, but if you're first starting out with SC/BW you won't usually use micro all that much. Where as with War3 is necessary even for newcomers to master it asap. I wonder if they made another Starcraft (unlikley in our lifetime) if they would adapt War3's smaller army size and hero system, or keep the old system. Or since Bliz is always to creative they'll think up something we never thought could work :P |
|||
|
SirNukes
Cow Master Posts: 2268 (2/28/04 12:00 am) Reply |
Re: Warcraft III Ya, something new, like an RPG with RTS elements. Oh, wait, War3 was supposed to be that and Blizzard couldn't pull it off. ...Sorry, I was a little ticked when Blizzard abandoned what I thought was a cool idea. I woulda bought War3 otherwise, most likely. -Brent |
|||
![]() Posts: 1262 (3/1/04 7:43 pm) Reply |
Re: Warcraft III It's NOT an RPG with RTS elements? Seems like it...why? What did they leave out? Have you played it, Sir Nukes? Eric |
|||
|
JonGCR
Private Posts: 15 (3/1/04 9:53 pm) Reply |
Re: Warcraft III I'm not sure what Nukes is talking about there either. Maybe earlier in development they had it even more RPGish? |
|||
|
SirNukes
Cow Master Posts: 2269 (3/2/04 12:27 am) Reply |
Re: Warcraft III It was originally Much more "RPGish." Blizzard scrapped the idea when pretty far into the design. It's kinda like how they scrapped Warcraft Adventures, but that game they weren't able to overhaul. -Brent |
|||
|
JonGCR
Private Posts: 16 (3/2/04 3:10 pm) Reply |
Re: Warcraft III
I think I remember them saying that a Hero could only command a certain amount of troops depending on their level or something. I can't remeber exactly.
|
|||
<< Prev Topic |
Next Topic >>
|
Topic Commands |
|