Ranting on Starcraft 1, yes 1

Probably something to do with how you get it. If you could directly infest a bunker, that would make Bunkers a liability Marines wouldn't use and your "infestor" mandatory to handle Bunkers.
But if you had to flush Marines out first, then it wouldn't work as you'd destroy the Bunker before the Marines left it.

Maybe there was a mechanic to force Marines out when the Bunker is on fire, or maybe a unit that flush them out and the infestation took time that left it unprotected, but that sounds like a nightmare to balance so they most likely stopped doing that.

It would make more sense to make Infested Houses that you can take to deny population to the Terrans and have them produce infested civilians every 5 seconds that only lasted a short amount of time or exploded on death.

...

Antimeme age

Because esports.
Map doodads aren't balanced enough for esports. They either give one faction a big advantage over the other or they give different advantages that are then a mess to balance.
They would also need to be symetrical as nearly all SC maps are because balance and muh esports.
Now consider that they need to cut down the time it takes to balance the game because if it takes too long, the game dies out before they finish (like WH Dawn of War).

Basically, esports. Esports.
FUCKING ESPORTS

Shit. I don't think I've ever seen a post that screams "I'm such an underage faggot with no clue what I'm talking about" before.

Nah, get fucked. Both expansions were shit from the get go. The added units were shit that barely affects the game because "can't touch muh precious esports balance".
Storywise they were mediocre aswell, and the more patches they launched the more the focus changed to multiplayer instead of fun.
You're the underaged faggot who didn't get the alpha and have zero fucking idea what this game could have been.

But hey, you got your SC2, brand new, shinny with Phoenix Kerrigan for you to jerk over, right? Who gives a shit about map interaction and strategy, let's just de-volve the genre into build orders, micro and launch several patches that cut down on the number of strategies so everyone uses the same 3 or 4 cookie-cutter strats.

Congratulations, you are responsible for a game that not even the gooks want now. Feel proud?

I can admit to never playing starcraft but atleast I'm not fucking deluded about it's history.

Oh right, how could I forgot the hallmark of latter SC patches and pretty much every SC2 patch too?
After broodwar, did you ever see a protoss player bothering with the air units? And winning? No you didn't, because all those units were terrible from every aspect. Same with half the terran units, especially every vehicle except for arty. And if you played Zerg, forget about anything that isn't a queen, you're gonna lose.

Big diference there, you cum slurper.
They didn't "make it" for esports. They TURNED it into esports. And that is what's terrible. Lots of people bought the game expecting something like C&C but sci-fi. Instead we got a slightly more boring version of chess.

But user chess is pretty fun

wew lad.

It's funny you should say that, because both SC and Chess share the same problem.

There's exactly TWO times where they are fun. When you're learning, and when you're a pro.
When you're learning the game, exploring the diferent factions and what you can do is pretty fun. Also the campaigns to a lesser extent.
After that, it becomes fun when you get to very, very higher skill levels. Think Kasparov for instance. Or Deep Blue if you're into /clang/.
Watching or playing against them is a marvel.
Anything in between isn't. You're actually seeing two fairly inept people deploying imperfect strategies that will mostly work out of luck or abusing a flaw in the game (that will get patched in two months).
That's it. That's the whole ladder of SC2 right now until you get near the top. And it's the most boring ass shit I ever bothered to climb. And I've played tons of boring shit before. Not even ASSFAGGOTS are this boring or repetitive.

Get fucked.

...

Ignoring the fact that you can't patch chess you're still dismissing the sheer bantz factor of those two+ faggots. Now I can't rightly say anything about laddering, I only played brood wars on lan and WC3 was about getting drunk with 2+ faggots and finding randoms mods on battle-net.

Wings of Liberty campaign was pretty fun though.

This isn't twitter asshole, we can write more than 150 characters in our post.
If you slap together a bunch of buzzwords, don't expect others to even bother extracting meaning from the ravings of a memespouter.

Where are the buzzwords? I simply pointed out the flaws with your reasoning and you responded with a completely off point response. if you say wew lad is a buzzword, I'd like to point you do the bigger offender "It doesn't matter, it was just an alpha :^)"

Don't bother with the ladders. That's my advice.
Climbing them is repetitive and not very challenging. The suposed "good" players at the top are 50% guys who paid for accounts or people who cheese the ladders (you'll also see those, but it's rare enough that it's a minor setback).

IF you played it in LAN with friends, congratulations. You found the best way to enjoy WC3 and SC.
This game went on of hours on us pulling stupid shit like this all the time. Far, FAR better than "muh serious competition"

At least garrisoning units in buildings could cause some issues - terran bunkers would become largely redundant while terran marines become OP because they are the only T1 unit with a ranged attack, potentially resulting in you getting screwed if there are garrisonable structures near you main base. You would also need units with dedicated garrison-clearing abilities.

IIRC Starcraft's Alpha actually had some "neutral" structures such as a mercenary starport, but at the end of the day, I think it also may just have been a time/resource issue - they had to go from the earliest Starcraft (WC2 IN SPAAACE) to a completely new engine.

i know exactly what you mean, that is a folly of rts in general i think. they tend to be inflexible games.

Thanks, but it wasn't really something I was considering to begin with. And if you think that's something I once won a bet for ~300DMs over a pair of faggots failing to break my turtling in a local WC3 lan tournament.
They rushed my dumbass orc partner but thankfully the map was wooded as fuck. So I built a wall of ziggurats and necropolis(es) with my sleeping dreadlord funsquad being the lynchpin. The battle lasted for like four hours before one of them conceded.

Sc2 is shit. But so are people who hate cheese. Cheese is derogatory slang for unortodox strategy. Basically hating creative play.

The kind of sandbox shit you described is cheese you fucking idiot. Just cause you roleplay and suck at playing doesn't change the nature of your play.

i dont know about that one captain

Because that isn't the focus of the game. Those are just for flavor, anything "special" went to the campaign or custom maps.

Now make all those interactions for Terran, Protoss and Zerg.

Nope. Cheese is a derogatory slang for underhanded strategies. Things you can do to increase your odds of winning against unprepared players that aren't particularly fun for anyone, unless you're one of those "I only have fun winnin" faggots.

"unortodox strategy" is a term to emcompasses far more than cheesing.
Spending every resource in towers is unorthodox but isn't cheesing.
Zerg rushing is also unorthodox but is cheesing.

Starting to see a pattern here? Cheesing is an unortodoc strategy that takes advantage of an imbalance in the game to give you a cheap win (like the lack of early game options from Terrans/protoss compared to zergs).

In Age of Mythology, using the initial Ulfsarks to wall off your oponent is cheesing. But using shifting sands to invade their base with an entire army isn't.

The main diference lies in the fact that countering unortodox and creative strategies requires you to actually play the game and experiment. Countering cheese requires you to play a whole diferent game or not play at all In SC instance of the Zerg rush, countering it was terrans involves you building a couple of marines as fast as possible in atecipation of it.
But that only pays off IF he zerg-rushes. In all other games, you're gimping yourself out of 350 Crystal early on. That's why people have a Gentleman's agreement to NOT be huge faggots like that.

I always thought Cheese was referring to a) flavor of the month tactics depending on what got buffed last or b) stuff 6pool rushes that don't require much skill to use but still can win you the match.

well, in universe at war cars and buildings were the resource pools for 2 of the 3 factions, and the hierarchy could even harvest humans, or turn their beam on the enemy if it came down to it.
real scary stuff man

Explain your logic once more, please.

If you're playing any kind of ladder, your enemy will want to fuck your shit up using any of the tools available.

It's war nigga, there are no rules for engagements (besides don't hack the game or ddos the other player).

If you're playing against Ulfsarks, learn to counter them.

Why not hack the game and ddos the other player?
It's war nigga, there are no rules for engagements.

Because the game didn't come with a free version of lmaobox, and if I the only thing I have to do is move my character while it automatically headshots everybody, then that's boring as shit. Unless you're doing it for reactions.

It only worked for Dark Souls PVP.

The solution is to play many times against the same opponent, until he learns not to rush you.
The zerg player is also fucking himself out of minerals big time by failing a rush.

Ence why I don't play any kind of ladder. It's nothing but tryhards doing the most "unorthodox" strategies to win instead of having fun and being a good sport.

You didn't understood his point.
A zerg-rusher is screwing himself out of many materials in a gamble for an early win.
A player predicting such a strategy will also screw himself out of minerals to prevent it from happening.
But both of these things only pay-off if the other oponent reacts the way you predicted, at this point you're no longer playing Starcraft but rather "Rush or not Rush?"

By the time the initial rush is done, the game is over. If it failed, the Zerg player gimped his economy to a point he won't be able to compete with the Terran but if he didn't rush, the Terran player wasted resources too soon and won't expand as fast, losing the game later on.
All because of that "unorthodox strategy", that made the rest of the game mostly irrelevant.

That's why people agree not to pull those kinds of tricks, because they actually want to play Starcraft 2 against another human, not simply winning. And if you value winning over playing the game or you even consider that winning is the whole point of the game, congratulations! You can add RTS games to your kill list.

...

Amazing, isn't it?

you need to really work on your english mate. your ability to comprehend points is astoundingly bad.

And if you prepare for an underhand strategy, usually you'll destroy it and your opponent will be handicapped all game because of it.

It's WIFOM, not cheese.

it's more like prisoners dilemma tho, if you prepare and it comes you win, but if it doesn't you lose, reverse if you attack

Let's try it again.

If your oponent used that strategy, you mean. If he didn't, you waste resources in the early game making troops that see no use instead of expanding your eco a bit more and that small loss at the start is exponential to the time a match takes.
So while you're going on your fifth worker, your oponent is already on his 15th because he didn't rushed.

There's a reason rushes are so often equated to coin flips and why they are equally fun and interesting (i.e. they aren't)

That's a very apt metaphor actually, but not for that reason. In a prisoners dillemma, the best outcome comes from both players not trying to backstab each other, but the logical and individualist choice is to doubt the adversary and backstab him.

So while both players could enjoy a long drawn out and fun game of their favorite RTS, they will instead resort to rushing the oponent because they fully expect the adversary to do it, leading to a shallow, short and unsatisfying experience.
Congratulations user! You figured out what killed the RTS.

If you punched your friends in the balls not only would that be a crime, he would stop being your friend and playing with you. If you tell him before hand that anything goes and that you'll may or may not punch him in the balls, the race is decided by whoever punches the other in the balls first, and the hardest.
Get real nerd you bought SC2 thinking it was Simcity, got destroyed by zerglings and instead of learning from your mistakes you decide to cry like a fucking bitch.

That's a problem with gameplay, not the players.

And this is why RTS is dead.

And what's that problem? That rushing is possible? Quid pro quo.

The real cheese strategy here is going full economy without pumping out any fighters, and you deserve to be punished for it. Same for not scouting. It's a good idea to start with a few early units, and it's usually a bad idea to send them out blind hoping to catch the other guy with his pants down.
Did you even play the game?

Cheesing is specifically and exclusively a strategy that functions based on the expectations of your opponent. The reason it works so well in Starcraft is because players have fallen into easy-to-follow flowcharts and almost everyone scouts.
Various cheeses have become more or less effective as their strategy becomes an "accepted start"
Several habits people learn from more experienced players in TvT or TvP are due to BBS, Worker Rush integrally changed common builds. As these were developed and integrated into the mainstream, they lost their efficacy (in higher play).
The trade-off for cheesing is losing integral stability provided by carefully tested strategies that are used in common play. The goal of those is not to 'counter', but to hedge their bets.
Cheesing requires you to take integral risks most 'Creative strategies' simply don't require.
It's a necessary element to prevent stagnation in gameplay, and new cheeses tend to signify a major shift in 'real gameplay' due to an integral flaw being located with builds, popular maps, or strategy.
If you lose to cheese more than you win, it is also 100% a clue that you are doing something very, very wrong somewhere in your gameplay.

Go play some assfaggots, those are "alive" with 60" games.

For you some it may be a problem, for others it's just something to consider.

Otherwise you wouldn't be shitposting here.
Check out russian roulette.
Says the retard having trouble with zergs lmao.

There was a trivia game called Friend or Foe based around this

There were 3 pairs of contestants that were whittled down to a new pair at the end based on performance. The final showdown was to either vote Friend and split the prize money (usually up to $2000) or vote Foe and take or for yourself. If you both vote Foe then you get fucking nothing and the episode was a blueballed waste of time

While 6 pool rush is effective, SCVs have 20 more hp than other workers

analogy wars, the most effective way to get your point across and convince them of the errors of their ways

Nobody's equated food with shit yet though, it's like I'm not even on Holla Forums

When a game that is supposed to be entirely about Strategy gets decided 5 minutes in by a tactical assault you can't scout or get notice off, and the only way to prevent it is to gimp your economy in the hopes to MAYBE counter it if it even happens, the game is inherently flawed.

Rts is dead because there hasn't been a good rts since fa. The coinflippy nature of a lot of strats in sc2 is not the fault of players it's a fault in the design of the game. It's just not dynamic enough, basically buildorders the game.

Frankly basebuilding 6-10 mins and then snowballing eachother is only fun for so long when the economy/build/scouting stage is primitive/unengaging. If I cared about winning I would do that.

You could burn down goddamn trees with your firebats!!

Technically, it can be scouted. Most RTS games gives you a unit you can send ahead to explore the Fog of War or if the map is explored, to see what your oponent is opening with.
Doesn't mean rushes are okay or interesting because of it, though.

Now compare those stages to just about any 4X, where you gotta explore the map in the start and carefully pick where you place your first 3-5 bases according to the map features, where different factions get scouts with significant differences and where economy is practically half the game and managing it is sometimes as hard as the military part.

Only thing RTS has going over those games is the real time military aspect, but that's ruined both by the APMfags and because RTT is a thing if that's the feature you like the most.
I'd rather play Endless Legend with Necrophages if I wanted to build a sprawling base of Zergs or Company of Heroes if I wanted to blow shit up with Terran.

what is the best way to play starcraft 1 and diablo 1 in windows 7 without so much trouble?
Have some lewds as payment for your troubles.

Right click > Compatibility Options > XP SP3.

I mean, this should be basics for any game prior to 2004.

diablo1.ovh.org/hd/?download
The top option there. And if the colors turn wonky sometimes (a strange psychedelic spectrum), alt-tab to desktop, open the change resolution screen, leave it on and alt-tab back to the game.

...

Compatibility mode has NEVER worked for me.
Not once.

I forget what game it was, but it worked once and I was absolutely shocked.

I have the universe's top scientists trying to understand why the morons felt the need to copy the tyranids, but without any of the qualities 40k had to offer in the first place.

Why not just separate the competitive E-sports bullshit and the adventure custom map campaigns?

If it wasn't for the custom maps then Starcraft and Warcraft would be long dead.
Blizzard would also be starving if they never that cheap mmorpg off of Warcraft.

They also copied the Eldar, aka Protoss.

And I doubt Blizzard ever expected that Starcraft I would become Worst Korea's national sport.

How very aptly put.

no, they copied the alien vs predator IP
the terrans are the humans
the protoss are the predators
the zerg are the aliens
damn, anons, are you that blind?

AvP doesn't have Marines in literal power armor trouncing around with big guns and double barrel tanks, unlike WH40K, nevermind the Zerg are NOTHING like Xenomorphs. Also Warcraft was originally based on Warhammer Fantasy, it's no wonder Stacraft has so many WH40k references.

its like you didnt play the game or watched the movie

you just described every fantasy story after the lord of the rings books

Power loaders aren't armor, they're exosuits.

Also tyranids steal DNA by just eating their victim and reproduce by laying spores on the entire planet from a mothership. Xenomorphs instead reproduce by fusing with the host's DNA after facehugging them and have no galaxy-spanning empire. Zerg are closer to Tyranids in that manner.

It's a pure coincidence :^)

Starcraft copied 40k, this is well known (and even admitted by Blizzard). Much like how Warcraft copied Warhammer fantasy.

In terms of "inventing things" the only big thing that Aliens did was pioneered the concept of literal "space marine". In terms of "power armor" that's been a thing since the 1950s with Starship Troopers.

Not a lot of these concepts were particularly original. They were largely based on other shit that was popular at the time. (Like Aliens is just Vietnam soldiers in space).

As well as AvP, not just Warhammer.
The first Starcraft has a lot of lines from the Terran Units that you can easily find in an AvP movie, their Transport being the most famous one but also a lot of the Zerg sounds.

Also do keep in mind that in the first game, Zerg were handled as an experiment of the Terran as a bioweapon to unleash on their enemies and controlled by the Ghosts (even if indirectly). Sounds a lot closer to Aliens being exploited by Marines as possible bioweapons than a race from outer space.

Blizz does this shit in all their games. WC3 was fucking loaded with monty python quotes, WoW had even more from a fuck ton of pop culture shit as well.

There is actually an old aliens comic about this.

Well yeah but this was largely superficial. A lot of media at the time homaged Aliens. Like Duke Nukem 3D even had lines taken from Aliens

Yeah, no shit. I have a friend who's a big fan of Warhammer, both 4K and fantasy and he told me that this is a very grey issue as it happened in a time where companies didn't really had a standard to follow so they copied each other whenever that shit looked like it could be popular.
Warcraft copied Warhammer Fantasy, Warhammer 40K copied Starcraft, and both somewhat copied AvP and Starship Troopers, etc, etc.
It's a clusterfuck that doesn't really matter, at the same time you're still playing the same thing but with a different flavour. Do you want religion with your man or just Imperial Guard and artillery?

More like copyright laws weren't enforced in videogames as harshly as they are now and AvP was popular among SciFi fans.
It's one thing to take quotes, it's another to rip audio files and conceps for characters entirely.
For instance, Zerg don't actually have Queens. They have some units that could maybe be considered equivalent, but not really. The idea of queens, eggs, larvae, infestors and infested Command Centers? All AvP.

Whether a law is "enforced" depends on if the company wants to sue or not. Like for instance Games Workshop tried to sue a writer for using the term "space marine" as the title of a book and lost because they didn't actually invent the term. Copywrite law is a nebulous thing since it's not treated like a criminal law. You have to actually protect your copywrite and show that you're protecting it in order to actually prosecute someone with it. It's why Bethesda did a frivolous lawsuit against Notch for using the word "Scrolls" in a video game.

In the context of "concepts of characters" you're going to need to go into greater detail since Starcraft's characters were more based on characters from other media. Like Jim Raynor was based on a character of the same name from a movie called Rush.

If you're going to claim that Blizzard actually stole assets you're going to need to present actual proof of that since I'm 100% certain that isn't actually the case.

These weren't things Aliens created. There have been countless science fiction films and comics in the past that did the same thing. Like you can easily point to something like John Carpenter's the Thing as an inspiration as well.

Something you have to understand is that it isn't illegal to base something off another. Much like how Aliens itself wasn't original. It was the sequel to Alien which was itself based on an earlier John Carpenter film called Dark Star.

...

Here's a Blizzard artist who worked on Starcraft 2 admitting that they have negotiated with Games Workshop over the use of different concepts in the game that are similar to Warhammer 40k.

eh, all in all starcraft 1 wasnt so bad. the campaign was great, probably the best rts campaign out there. i never got the appeal of the multiplayer though. its not even a strategy game anymore at high levels, its a somewhat strategic clicker. its more about practicing micromanagment routines to keep your economy running and doing repetitive tasks that could just as well be automated than about actualy commanding your units or building your base. competitive starcraft is bullshit where apm is more important than gamesense, strategy or tactics.

That's a big piece of toothpick graveyard.

Nice almost quads, like your post.
I agree with you on all points excep for the "best rts campaign" Battle Realms, Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, Star Trek, Empire Earth, Stronghold, Company of Heroes, and especially the Command & Conquer series had much more interesting campaigns than SC could ever dream of.

Red Alert 2 completely spoiled me with its allied campaign where everything practically plays by itself and you just have to press the red button to win the missions.
Brood War's scripted campaigns paled in comparison to Red Alert's.

Do 40k tyranids have anything like the zerg cerebrates? I can't think of anything.

I keep having this idea that the only way RTS could be significantly improved to the point it could have a resurgence was to have a great deal of it's gameplay automated by the player according to the strategy he chooses, letting you worry about unit composition, timing and economy instead of dicking around with micro.

For instance, in Starcraft when you move a large amount of Marines you'll often command them like a deathball, all tigh-knit and issued the same orders. Very rarely you'll order only a small amount of units to do something different like targetting a specific target or spread out.
However, selecting them all is still constrained by your camera and their position or you managing to double-click on fast moving units.
It would make much more sense to have a single unit, a commander of sorts, that you assign Marines to and he moves about with them all in formation. Clicking on any marine would select the commander and allow you to control the whole group, with formation options to spread out and other movements.

Dawn of War and Battle for Middle Earth sorta do this with their squads that end up being treated as a single unit. However, they are far too small and specialized instead of being a composition of units.
Having a commander controlling Firebats in the front, Marines in the middle and Goliath tanks in the back with the option to move it and change it's facing or formation at will, having all the individual unit's abilities in a small panel so you don't have to select an individual one and even a small menu to give preferential targerts to each kind of unit would make that squad a force to be reckoned with provided you "program" it right and supply a good unit composition.

The best part is that manipulating 5-4 of these armies is far more manageable than the current micro to control 50 units or more and yet it allows you to have battles with 200-300 units depending on how much you put per squad while actually increasing the tactical depth of combat as many strategies suddendly become more practical.

For instance, having the option of a Delayed attack, where you make a squad target an enemy squad but he doesn't attack unless in retaliation or if any other friendly squad engages him first. Specifically for Starcraft, you could have a small squad of Dark Templar that you deploy in the back of your oponent army and make a delayed attack on their main force with Casters as their prefered target. As soon as your Zealot deathball engages their army, your Dark Templars will jump in and murder them.

Remember when vultures could directly launch the spider mines like torpedoes and do splash damage?
Or when the queens had the mutalisk attack, and mutalisks had a short-range green flame attack.
When the science vessel had legs and when zerg drones could infest command centers.
I remember that being in the beta at least.

kill explorer.exe, run starcraft through task manager

You mongrels, just ignore the fucking melee crap and mess with custom maps which offer actually fun weird scenarios and interesting environments and maybe even a story.

...

Gookclickers everyone.