Comparing Warcraft 3 agaisnt Starcraft:Broodwar

[BANANAMAN]

Ignoring the graphics,Storyline,Editor,etc and focusing straight on the gameplay which is better,more intense,would last longer in the gaming scene,and has more strategies ever created?

Starcraft or warcraft? And why? and no fanboy based opinions here please.

 

[Tythoid]

I prefer of warcraft 3 gameplay for 2 reasons
1. Less microing then starcraft3 some will oppose this but micro I feel removes some of the tactics and teching importance
2. heroes in warcraft3 add a great alternative to just capturing resources something that you improve the preformance of besides your army
3. With RTSs i prefer lower graphics as the lower the more chance your ally has of staying the whole game without dc'ing, the wider the group of players as more people have the right hardware and less destraction from the unit movements and targets with flashy graphics
I have a feeling warcraft 3 will stay in the gaming scene for the longest as it appeals to a larger audience as for them most intense probbably starcraft3. Alot of my reasons for picking warcraft 3 are speculation as I dont know so much about starcraft3 other then playing the other 2 games and reading a few articles on it I would have to play it and im sure ill like it :thup:

 

[Jaujarahje]

1. Less microing then starcraft3

You mean starcraft broodwar there right? Because there is no starcraft 3.
I am completely torn on this.

Starcraft- has more action and less strategy in it (well at least the way I play which is admittedly not great.) which i like cause im not one for strategy, its more mass and kill for me and i find that really fun. and to me the armor system is a lot less confusing in starcraft than warcraft.

Warcraft- This is more strategy based then starcraft which I don't really like due to my limited patience of slowly building an army, then creeping and teching, and then the micro which i just plain suck at. But then again it requires erm "more" to be truly skilled at this. This is of course only talking about the Melee gameplay. For custom maps i'd say warcraft hands down due to the far vaster range of maps you can make in it.

 

[BANANAMAN]

We're just comparing gameplay.

Starcraft:
1.Fast paced,Intense melee games.
2.The terrain does affect a few strategies like whether you should choose placing artillery on top of cliffs or not. But ultimately the game would revolve around the players,the units and how the players use them.
3.It's like chess and battleships combined but on steroids
4.The amount of strategies and how creative they are border on the batfack insane.
5.The death times are instant telling you immediately killed that enemy unit so that you can immediately focus on a new threat. This comes in handy when your focus firing in an intense battle that require intense battle where every second counts.Waiting confirmation that one of the enemy's men died can cost you the entire battle.
6.Pimpest plays
7.Epic displays of strategies. (I've played a lot of games that really deserves to be called "gg")

 

[jonadrian619]

Man, I only played Starcraft when I was at pre-school, and beyond, and probably the most appealing RTS game I've played.

Starcraft is better because:

It has no lag, almost. Still this depends on the specs of the computer you're operating. Lag interferes with a gamer's performance, and even pro gamers suck in a laggy pc. Strategies can be executed without hesitation, and all that you need to do is to click the mouse, press some keys and have fun! The units are well-balanced.

It's just like a 3D virtual board game, no interfering lag, and the computer immediately receives orders from the click of the mouse.

 

[rover2341]

I enjoyed starcraft. And most of my freinds enjoyed it more. But i had alot more fun playing Warcraft 3 online. (not custom games).

Perhaps because of the automated system. But i think i just find warcraft 3 more enjoyable, with hero's and less units ect.

 

[Duwenbasden]

Melee: Starcraft. WC3 is way too slow, and units last too long in battle (I am pretty sure 3 arrows are enough to kill you, not 50.)

Customs: Warcraft 3. More variety.

 

[Cheesy]

Melee: Starcraft. WC3 is way too slow, and units last too long in battle (I am pretty sure 3 arrows are enough to kill you, not 50.)

Customs: Warcraft 3. More variety.

That about sums it up, and that's exactly how I feel as well.

 

[Azlier]

Melee: Starcraft. WC3 is way too slow, and units last too long in battle (I am pretty sure 3 arrows are enough to kill you, not 50.)

Customs: Warcraft 3. More variety.

Meanwhile, my marines are taking four hits from a siege tank each before they die. More, with those medics and their healing flashlights.

 

[rover2341]

they do have battle armor you know. lol. But ya. you got a point

 

[xxxtrickyxxx]

i like any rts that lets me send ten thousand troops to their death with a simple click of a button...

 

[Azlier]

So you don't like a single RTS out there right now? Starcraft maximum selection: 12 units. Warcraft 3: 12 units. Warcraft 2: (Don't know) Warcraft I: 4 units.

 

[BANANAMAN]

I hear starcraft 2 would let you select upto 200 units at a single time.

Also marines don't take 4 hits vs seige tanks. Marines have 40 hp. Seige tanks do 70 damage in siege mode.
The medics would able to increase there life for about 3 more seconds. Also i find that the terran workers having 60 hp (20 hp more than the marines) is kinda weird. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

 

[Jaujarahje]

I hear starcraft 2 would let you select upto 200 units at a single time.

Also marines don't take 4 hits vs seige tanks. Marines have 40 hp. Seige tanks do 70 damage in siege mode.
The medics would able to increase there life for about 3 more seconds. Also i find that the terran workers having 60 hp (20 hp more than the marines) is kinda weird. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

But look at the marine compared to SCV, marine has some armor to protect him while the scv is pretty much surrounded by armor so logically he should have more health and/or armor

 

[Azlier]

I hear starcraft 2 would let you select upto 200 units at a single time.

Also marines don't take 4 hits vs seige tanks. Marines have 40 hp. Seige tanks do 70 damage in siege mode.
The medics would able to increase there life for about 3 more seconds. Also i find that the terran workers having 60 hp (20 hp more than the marines) is kinda weird. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

Who said anything about siege mode? I meant when the tanks were mobile

 

[Venge22]

Warcraft II lets u select 8 units. Go figure XD

 

[Cheesy]

Warcraft II lets u select 8 units. Go figure XD

12.

I hope they keep the selection limit ~200, that will make for some VERY interesting custom maps.

 

[Jaujarahje]

Im pretty sure marines take 2 hits from a siege tank before dying but im not 100% sure on this.

 

[Duwenbasden]

12.

I hope they keep the selection limit ~200, that will make for some VERY interesting custom maps.

9! 3x3!

 

[Revengez]

WC3. I love using heroes. It's epic, i wish sc2 had heroes. It would be more 'epic'