Warcraft III: A good RTS?

[Thrasher]

It's my first, and I'm quite hating the gameplay. It seems to be about how well you know the multitude of keyboard shortcuts, and how fast you can micromanage lots of details using the shortcuts. Very little about strategy, and tactics are impossible until you master speedy micromanagement.

It feels like diablo II x 10, with hardly any RPG elements.

Or am I totally missing something?

 

[Darth Roxor]

W3 gets old fast. After like half of the undead campaign it gets terribly boring.

 

[silver crowaxe]

Agreed, it gets old very fast. I do not like the fact that you have to get a hero unit in order to be of any use.

In fact if your hero dies, you are screwed.

 

[Texas Red]

Agreed, it gets old very fast. I do not like the fact that you have to get a hero unit in order to be of any use.

In fact if your hero dies, you are screwed.

Your choice of avatar deserves an applause, sir.

 

[kingcomrade]

The answer to your question is no.

 

[Thrasher]

But do any good RTS's differ from WC III in the basic gameplay (i.e. fast micromanagement keyboard shortcut skillz always win)?

 

[silver crowaxe]

Agreed, it gets old very fast. I do not like the fact that you have to get a hero unit in order to be of any use.

In fact if your hero dies, you are screwed.

Your choice of avatar deserves an applause, sir.

A character of epicness.

 

[JarlFrank]

But do any good RTS's differ from WC III in the basic gameplay (i.e. fast micromanagement keyboard shortcut skillz always win)?

The Cossacks Series [including American Conquest]
Age of Empires series is a lot slower than WC3
Rise of Nations and Rise of Legends
Anything that relies on tactics with a fixed amount of units instead of base-building [like the Sudden Strike and Blitzkrieg series]

 

[Thrasher]

The thing that kills me is how awkward it is to select units, and get them to do the right thing fast enough.

Where's the strategy in that?

 

[RainSong]

But do any good RTS's differ from WC III in the basic gameplay (i.e. fast micromanagement keyboard shortcut skillz always win)?

Check Starcraft (more macro, less micro) and it's _the best_ rts ever.

 

[Thrasher]

Yes, that's what most everyone says, although WC III got better reviews, so I guess the press lied again.

I should have known better....

 

[silver crowaxe]

Starcraft is indeed made of win and it has a single-player that is actually worth playing.

 

[vrok]

Starcraft is a lot faster than WC3 and keyboard shortcuts/unit selection is even more important because you will be controlling a lot more units/buildings with even more limited controls since the game is 10 years old.

So even though I agree that Starcraft is the best RTS ever, I can't recommend it to you because of your disdain for actually controlling a game in real time. What you want is turn based slacker mode or a device that reads your mind to perform in game actions.

 

[Thrasher]

So all RTS's are about fast shortcut skillz and micromanagement?

 

[Texas Red]

It's pretty safe to say that you picked the EXTREME choice. Every RTS is less about micromanagement unit abilities than WC 3. I wanted to ease in to the understanding of gradually getting new units in the campaign, but the campaign is SUCH SHIT. It's more about walking from point A to point B with a predetermined army and having zero challenge. As I said somewhere here before, the human campaign has absolutely no mission where you build a base from the beginning to the end.

With Starcraft you will be driven to play the campaign just because of good storytelling, setting and movies. The game is not as complex as newer RTS but apparently it remains so popular because races are very different. I'd say it's a good RTS because you can learn the tricks quickly and not be overwhelmed.

 

[Texas Red]

So all RTS's are about fast shortcut skillz and micromanagement?

Nope. WW 3 is the extreme example of this.

 

[Thrasher]

Figures. Why did it rank so highly then in the press?

OK, I'll give the genre one more chance with Starcraft. If I find myself fighting against the controls again, and not actually having fun with tactics and strategy, the genre will be forever shitcanned.

 

[Bluebottle]

Don't know if I'd class them as traditional RTSs, but Medieval: Total War & Shogun: Total War have always been my favourite strategies. Avoid them if you've got an 8000 or 9000 series Nvidia graphics card, though. Medieval 2 is worth a play (especially if you get it packaged with the exp. pack), but it isn't a patch on either of the first two. Avoid Rome like the clap.

Total Annihilation probably remains the best traditional RTS, especially if you don't like too much speedy micro-managment.

 

[Thrasher]

BTW I was severely challenged on human campaigns 6 and 7 (took a few tries each with savepoints in the middle). Dreading #8 now, the story is depressing.

Though maybe playing on normal on a modern computer is too fast for a RTS newb like me.

 

[DraQ]

But do any good RTS's differ from WC III in the basic gameplay (i.e. fast micromanagement keyboard shortcut skillz always win)?

Try Homeworld and Myth II.

Of more traditional RTS games, I remember Dark Reign being quite interesting and demanding more than just a keyboard with cooling fans.

You can also try something called Netstorm for completely unconventional, WTF? experience (read: an RTS requiring tetris skills more than anything else).

Another, relatively modern game you might want to try is Nexus: Jupiter Incident, but it is more of a tactical fleet simulator than conventional RTS.

 

[Thrasher]

Or should I try a turned-based like Galactic Civ or Civ or Alpha Centauri?

 

[Trash]

At leas it's got some enjoyable movies. Otherwise it's rather boring. Personally I prefer games like Homeworld that actually need some skill from the player or stuff like COH that's just fun to play and blow shit up with. Starcraft is pretty good as well. Can't understand why people rave about the story though. Feels like a soap in space.

 

[JarlFrank]

Medieval 2 is worth a play (especially if you get it packaged with the exp. pack), but it isn't a patch on either of the first two. Avoid Rome like the clap.

Why should he avoid Rome? It's a better game than Medieval 2 IMO. He should get all the Total War games. And then a shitload of mods [Europa Barbarorum for Rome, Broken Crescent, Stainless Steel and Deus Lo Vult for Medieval 2].

 

[kingcomrade]

At leas it's got some enjoyable movies. Otherwise it's rather boring. Personally I prefer games like Homeworld that actually need some skill from the player or stuff like COH that's just fun to play and blow shit up with. Starcraft is pretty good as well. Can't understand why people rave about the story though. Feels like a soap in space.

i cryed when kerragin was infested

 

[Nedrah]

Just go watch some audio commentaries on wcreplays.com

If you still think the game isn't worth learning, go ahead and pick something different. You just shouldn't let the campaign (which I remember actually enjoying, at least the TFT one) give you the wrong impressions about the game as seen on battle.net

Apart from that, didn't we have a pretty big wc3 thread recently? Why don't you just have a look at the opinions people voiced there.