I liked playing WC3 a lot, but people have been telling me to give Starcraft a shot. What do you guys think about the differences in these two games?
Today someone told me they were playing LoL and that got me to look into League of Legions. Seems like another version of Dota. Any experiences with this game? I might download it and play around with the game for awhile.I love the base building, massive army rushes, and attack strategies in RTS games. I'm looking for something that'll keep me entertained for hours. Any suggestions would be great.
Starcraft 2 is very interesting. Make sure you do Starcraft 2. Since you like the massive army rushes I'm actually questioning if you played WC3 because you won with 5 units every game practically.
I used to be an avid WC3 fan. Would play night elf, would be really aggressive. Loved it. SC2 was a bit of a jump but not a bad one: It just took me a while to get down the macro mechanics of continue to make SCVs, compared to the WC3 5/5 workers on gold/wood. SC2 is mad fun, its got a race for anyone. I now do terran and I love doing nice little double pronged reaper/bio attacks on people.LoL is also fun, its a more natural feeling DotA. Make sure to have friends who play it, otherwise its a bit more tedious to get into.Oh, and don't go back to Brood War. Trust me, the jump from WC3 to BW is STUPIDLY HARD to adjust to. Not being able to hotkey 2 buildings at once? Not being able to select more than 12 units when the unit counts are stupidly high? YEP, GREAT WAY TO HATE IT.League of Legends is a hero-based RTS rather than a troop/building RTS. It was created by the same people who did DotA, so there are many similarities. But if you can't live without the army rushing, it may not be the game for you. However, I think the game is pretty cool, just better with friends like Kenon said, otherwise you're teaming with people who have no clue what they're doing, or people who get superpissed at one little mistake.
Oh, and it's strictly multiplayer. No campaign for you.SC2 is still really good multiplayer, since it's constantly being patched and relatively balanced. There is no real 'meta-game' yet since it keeps shifting and it's new enough that not everyone knows it like the back of their hand. It's competitive scene is looking very healthy as well.
If you're looking for a campaign mission game, SC2 has like, a few hours of gameplay at best and most of the cutscenes are not very eye-popping. It's story isn't really too fantastic either, but it's not really that bad. SC1 had a much more engaging story / campaign. But really, the mutiplayer is fantastic.I don't know if they still plan on having everything linked by 3 separately sold discs, since I don't keep up on their news much, but that was the chatter when BETA was going on.I played Starcraft 2 years ago
Back then, we called it "Rock-Paper-Scissors"But no actually Dawn of War 2: Retribution is an amazing and innovative RTS.. It focuses on micromanaging your units instead of boring you by making you build things. It's really strategy-intensive and customizable.Definitely try StarCraft. II would be more accessible, what with the being able to select more than 12 units at once and all…
Hootiehoo, care to elaborate on the rock-paper-scissors thing? I've noticed it's less-so like that than other RTS games. (ie no straight-up obvious cavalry->archers->infantry->cavalry. Sure, you can say dragoons>vultures>zealots>siegetanks>dragoons, but that's only in certain situations and isn't as concrete as other games.)DoW2 Retribution is nothing but strategy… I guess I didn't realize that mining minerals was some kind of advanced tactical maneuver
Knowing when to make workers v.s. expanding v.s. an army v.s. tech… removing that is removing an entire dimension from play.
–implying that mining minerals is the only thing you do in starcraft