Poll: Rushing in Starcraft

Recommended Videos

AugustFall

New member
May 5, 2009
1,110
0
0
http://www.youtube.com/user/HDstarcraft#p/u/0/MHT6cjr-bJ8

lol -^

I've seen a lot of people on here complain that they don't like getting rushed so early on in the game but I thought I'd like to get a discussion going on why you think it's okay/think it's bad gaming.

I personally think it's become a part of Starcraft and indeed a lot of RTSs, the moral is: build faster and keep your defences up from the start.
 

Klepa

New member
Apr 17, 2009
908
0
0
I guess people see it as unsophisticated.

The full potential and beauty of the game is in the different units, the balance between them, and the different strategies they allow you to use. You might as well play Dune II if you're just going to attack with starting units, basicly ignoring everything that makes SC2 better than other RTS games.
 

Airhead

New member
May 8, 2008
141
0
0
Hmm. I'm not a very advanced Starcraft player, but I think that an early rush with basic combat units is a viable strategy. It can be countered, and when that happens the attacker is left at a disadvantage.

Rushing with workers on the other hand looks more like a one-time trick. If it works - you win. If it doesn't - you're cooked. Basically the game is decided within seconds, leaving out all the potential complexity of the endgame. So yeah, I guess a worker rush dumbs down the game and I would be annoyed if it was tried on me frequently, even if I succeeded in defending myself. It would get very boring very quickly.
 

YoyoTimes5

New member
Jul 14, 2010
23
0
0
Klepa said:
I guess people see it as unsophisticated.

The full potential and beauty of the game is in the different units, the balance between them, and the different strategies they allow you to use. You might as well play Dune II if you're just going to attack with starting units, basicly ignoring everything that makes SC2 better than other RTS games.
Lol, you say the beauty of the game allows you to utilize different strategies and rushing is a strategy, why should it draw ire over other strategies. Its not IMBA or OP unless you are incompetent on a consistent basis.

Besides, saying something like "rush isn't fair" is a slippery slope. When is attacking "fair"?Do all your matches turn into NR? Those are the degenerate games, IMO.
 

Cody211282

New member
Apr 25, 2009
2,892
0
0
As much as I hate it I do have to say


I like games to last longer then 3 minutes so I never use it.
 

Avaholic03

New member
May 11, 2009
1,520
0
0
In a truly competitive RTS, rushing isn't about winning the game immediately. It's about keeping the pressure on, getting a resource advantage and eventually dominating the endgame. If someone gets rushed and loses quickly, then it's time to develop an opening strategy that's not all about teching quickly. It's not hard to counter. In SC2, Terrans can wall off their base, Zerg can mass cheap units and Protoss can out-micro with Stalkers. Being rushed doesn't have to mean you're dead. Just be ready for it.
 

randomsix

New member
Apr 20, 2009
773
0
0
It's really risky, so if you do something like that, and the game ends no matter what (you win if you find them, you lose if you don't), I think its stupid. If you want to play a game of russian roulette, I'm sure there are use map settings for that.
The more traditional zerg rush I still support, as rushing with combat units is a valid tactic.
 

Continuity

New member
May 20, 2010
2,053
0
0
The early rush is a gamble, like randomsix says, either way its game over. I think its a fine tactic so long as you think you have a good chance of winning, i.e. you're fairly sure you have some sort of edge, otherwise its just bad tactics because of the high risk.
 

Srdjan

New member
Mar 12, 2010
693
0
0
Yep WWII would be much different if Poland had two years to build up.

If you are too slow no matter how much strategic planning you have for the later stages you will lose and it should be like it.
 

siNwrath

New member
Feb 23, 2010
25
0
0
How is any form of rush in a reasonably balanced game environment anything other than OK? If it was a bad move, then the fault is on the player not the tactic.

I personally don't like the idea of playing a game where the players have decided on an arbitrary no-rush time, as it completely breaks the normal flow of the game, and offers little to no insight on how the game is actually played, but to each his own I guess. It kind of reminds me of people rage quitting in L4D2 because the score isn't in their favour, as if quitting will make you a better player in the long run.
 

David_G

New member
Aug 25, 2009
1,133
0
0
I'll just copy-paste my response from the other rushing thread:

I'm indifferent, but rushing is a legitimate strategy, even though it's kinda annoying. However, if you're a good player, you can counter it, and it's very funny and exciting to witness it in a pro-match, like Jaedong doing a 4-pool Zergling rush against Flash (in Starcraft, if you're wondering), it was awesome.

Explanation of the 4-Pool Zergling Rush:
In Starcraft Skirmish matches you start with 4 of your workers (Drones, SCVs or Probes) and your main building (Hatchery, Command Center or Nexus), ordinarily players gather minerals and build workers, the amount of workers depending on the strategy you want to be using during the match.

Normally Zerg spawn 9 or 10 Drones before building their next building, which is ordinarily either a Spawning Pool, or a second Hatchery. The Terran build 10 SCVs and while the 11th SCV is building they build either a Supply Depot, or a Barracks. The Protoss usually build 10 Probes, then a Pylon and then either a Gateway, or a Forge if they're looking to Fast Expand.

Now to the topic at hand the 4-Pool Zerg rush. A normal Zerg rush is a 9-pool rush, which means spawning 9 Drones, then building a Spawning Pool and then spawning the Zerglings. A 4-Pool is more crazy because you don't spawn any Drones, you just gather minerals with the Drones you have at the start, until you gather 200 Minerals and build your Spawning Pool. This is my favourite kind of rush because it's very rarely used today, and it's very interesting to see someone use it.

tl;dr: I like rushes because they're very fun to witness when utilized properly, and it's fun to see the victim struggling to counter.
 

Roganwilson

New member
May 24, 2009
199
0
0
I don't personally like rushing, but it is a valid strategy, and one that isn't hard to defeat, given experience with the game. However, I like long games, where you end with massive armies fighting in a winner-takes-all showdown. So rushing is against my code.
 

Zhukov

The Laughing Arsehole
Dec 29, 2009
13,769
5
43
Redundant thread is extremely redundant [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.223898-Poll-Rushing-and-you].

Even by the standards of this forum.
 

Claymorez

Our King
Apr 20, 2009
1,961
0
0
AugustFall said:
http://www.youtube.com/user/HDstarcraft#p/u/0/MHT6cjr-bJ8

lol -^

I've seen a lot of people on here complain that they don't like getting rushed so early on in the game but I thought I'd like to get a discussion going on why you think it's okay/think it's bad gaming.

I personally think it's become a part of Starcraft and indeed a lot of RTSs, the moral is: build faster and keep your defences up from the start.
It's part of the game - however it doesn't require alot of skill as all you have to do is watch a video of some 'pro' starcraft players do it with race x and then copy them as it tends to be the best way to pull that rush off.

I feel the more each player waits and develops their race and then have a war the more skill there becomes involved in winning as there are more options on how to react to situations.