I Vote SC2.. by far
nostalgia aside, there is no comparison at all

quote:

---

Originally posted by turtleman@can
I Vote SC2.. by far
nostalgia aside, there is no comparison at all

---

i agree with everything kith said, and will add that team games in war2 are much better than team games in sc2

War2 was much simpler but had better flow. As kith mentioned, you (in most cases) were constantly attacking, it required constant action with dire consequences if not responded to. You also had simple yet effective balance choices late game, i.e. ogres or dk's. This simple dichotomy was huge - 1 or 2 dk's could take out a giant army of ogres at a small cost. It was much more the case in war2 that a small number of well controlled units could destroy a large force with even the slightest mistake - and unfortunately that is very rarely the case with SC2.

SC2 is a more polished, more thought out refined experience, but at the core war2 has better core gameplay and flow in my opinion. And while the simplicity and first kept advantage made 1v1 games become somewhat predictable and repetitive, the solid core gameplay shone through in team games.
_________________
Kanuks - The fact is you and foonew tried a double gay on me and ended up being BOTH behind me. Enough fucking said.

I think war2 as a team game is the reason that war2 even belongs in the same conversation as SC2. The simplistic gameplay really forms a perfect storm in team games. But 1on1, there is absolutely no comparison. 1on1 war2 is a little bit too simple.

I don't agree with Kith's perception of SC2's stagnant gameplay. I think that the game is constantly evolving and right now, I never sit back and wait for a huge battle. I'm usually prodding/taking minor advantages when I can and reading the meta game and trying to stay 1 or 2 steps ahead of my opponent. War2 lacks this depth due to it's simplicity. War2 is basically won by the person who can macro the best. I don't think that unit control really ever played a large role in war2. If you had 200+ apm in war2 and knew the build orders, you were a god. In sc2, I can rape people with 2x my APM on pure strategy. This isn't possible in war2 which is why I don't think it's nearly as good.

quote:

---

Originally posted by turtleman@can

I don't agree with Kith's perception of SC2's stagnant gameplay. I think that the game is constantly evolving and right now, I never sit back and wait for a huge battle. I'm usually prodding/taking minor advantages when I can and reading the meta game and trying to stay 1 or 2 steps ahead of my opponent.

---

You're right in that I overlook some of war2's strategy. But basically what it boils down to is this: SC2 is war2 with rock-paper-scissors gameplay. Added advanced unit control. SC2 requires much more intelligence to play at a high level.

The added depth screws up team games because it becomes virtually impossible to play at a consistent basis.

I voted War2 because there are just too many things in SC2 that I dislike the game and only a few things in War2 that I dislike. I would go into detail but I have a class in a few minutes. maybe later
_________________
--Frostbitten

http://YouTube.com/war2combat | http://YouTube.com/FrostbittenWarcraft | http://www.denverchess.com | http://www.BureauA.com

I'm not sure how much skill in SC2 effects the outcome of the games. In chess the most skilled player has a huge influence on the game outcome. SC2 seems very random.
_________________
I have hacks in my brain and I use them.

imagine if sc2 had low med and high starting resources, cuz honestly, war2 on low res is quite boring, argue that as u may, but there are far less options low res than high res- which seems to be the point many are stating here, also why i didnt like war3 ladder, started low res and it almost traps u into playing a certain style


i think the answer is as simple as that
_________________
I am also a contradiction of my own lies

War2 on low res was godlike. But yeah everyone's hit the nail on the head in this thread already. SC2 is a great 1on1 game, but as an all round game, i still prefer war2 even for 1on1s, and team games its really no competition, war2 owns it hands down. Map design? Every 2on2 on sc2 is on friends.pud, how boring.
_________________

I go through spurts of loving SC2 but Id have to say war2, even though I really only played 08-10.

SC2 is random, I lose games feeling that my opponent was worse than I am. In war2 when I lost I almost never had this feeling.

Also, there are too many things that you have to prepare for (as zerg) in SC2. Which means if you want to play at your best level (laddering) you cannot do it if you are even remotely tired or not fully aware.

It leads to huge streaks of wins followed by huge streaks of losses when you get slightly tired. It gets nearly impossible to win unless you are 100% aware. In war2, I could play all night long really and for some reason, since there were only a few strategies and it was all about execution, it was doable.

The early game war2 was also awesome.

SC2 shines at times, but it falls short at times as well.

Sc2 lacks economy factor. You're almost never limited by minerals, but by gas, which you can't control as the most amount of gas you can get is those 2 patches with 3 workers. If you needed wood/gold in war2, you send more peons and have to balance that. This is never seen in sc2, unless in very early game where someone goes for some cookbook build when they need xxx amount of gasss. Later, all they care about economy is where to expand. My biggest beef with sc2 (and a lot of whiners and IMBA crying, and no real BM)
_________________

War2 has a lot more map diversity. I think of nwtr, maze, gow, etc., and they call for much different strats than most SC2 maps out there, and that's not including water.

quote:

---

Originally posted by x
War2 has a lot more map diversity. I think of nwtr, maze, gow, etc., and they call for much different strats than most SC2 maps out there, and that's not including water.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sparkz102

quote:

---

Originally posted by x
War2 has a lot more map diversity. I think of nwtr, maze, gow, etc., and they call for much different strats than most SC2 maps out there, and that's not including water.

---

imma gonna disagree with that, the variety of sc2 maps have a huge range of diversity, from size, spawning location, natural and other expos, gold expos, xelnaga towers, ledge play, entrances, and not to mention air battle and drops/island expos which the map has intended

---

Your crazy. WC2 had no map variety. GOW is played majority of the time. POS played some, nwtr less, b2b even less. WATER? ha. I'm speaking from 00-03.

Each map in sc2 depends so much on the strategy. Sure the ladder maps are weak right now, but playing iccup and gsl maps bring out many different strategy's. There are going to be maps created all the time. In wc2 maps were never created.
_________________
Anti-Jabroni

you're crazy, sc2 maps are all the same in principal, war2 is alot more diverse in terms of map control
_________________

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sparkz102

quote:

---

Originally posted by x
War2 has a lot more map diversity. I think of nwtr, maze, gow, etc., and they call for much different strats than most SC2 maps out there, and that's not including water.

---

imma gonna disagree with that, the variety of sc2 maps have a huge range of diversity, from size, spawning location, natural and other expos, gold expos, xelnaga towers, ledge play, entrances, and not to mention air battle and drops/island expos which the map has intended

---

i with drunken but its not the game it was the community.


but the fun factor of war2 i dont see many games that ever gonna = war2.
edit to me i see no rts ever made that ='s war2.
sc1 is ok but i quit that 2 years ago without thinking of quiting i just aint played ,war2 is the only one you got to quit lol.

i bet if blizz still tweaked war2 instead of leaving it close to vanilla in bne they'd would of screwed up the game,this game is almost like a accident without much thought to the multiplayer aspect after all single player was the main issue back then.and it wont be made again cause now multiplayer is all the focus.

i hope in sc2 you can play the map you want all the time if you want to.
in war3 i never could get the match maker to play the map i wanted ever!!
forced variety sucks.

i have never had any beefs with war2even lust made it funner with the sense of real urgency!! cause it was real.other games have no urgency in real time.

fun war2 will always win.
competition sc2 win

hell war2 is now using a ladder blid made
so this isnt even a fair comparison.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kith-Kanin

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sparkz102

quote:

---

Originally posted by x
War2 has a lot more map diversity. I think of nwtr, maze, gow, etc., and they call for much different strats than most SC2 maps out there, and that's not including water.

---

imma gonna disagree with that, the variety of sc2 maps have a huge range of diversity, from size, spawning location, natural and other expos, gold expos, xelnaga towers, ledge play, entrances, and not to mention air battle and drops/island expos which the map has intended

---

Ever had to move from somewhere with 60k minerals to 30k minerals in SC2?

Didn't think so...

---

I'm glad to see those results on a War2 forum

this is simple for me - i've been playing war2 for 11 years and it's still lots of fun, i played sc2 for a month or two and was bored

if sc2 had high starting resources, it woulda had my vote, as exciting as the sc2 environment is, replayability wins it for me and lord knows war2 has 10yrs of that for me
_________________
I am also a contradiction of my own lies