There are massive benefits to flanking in SC2. Taking down a collosus that was otherwise protected by a meat shield, hitting a mineral line whilst their army fights off a frontal attack, hell, flanking is the only way zerglings will ever take down a zealot, and protecting flanks is the best way of utilizing early zealots on defense. Terrain effects play a huge part in base defense and army structure. Having high ground is a huge advantage, and if you know you'll be assaulting high ground, you'll strategize thusly. SC has a reputation of being incredibly balanced for a reason, and thats because for every race and every unit, for every flank and every terrain advantage, there is a counter. It's up to you, the player, to find the counters and utilize them effectively.Grubnar said:Oh ... kay! First of all, do not call people "bitchy" just becaue you do not agrea with them or understand what they are saying.fanklok said:So because there's a unit in the game who's sole purpose is quick hit and run tactics and eventually demolition, that you don't like, it's a bad unit? Destroying necessary materials or the means to gather them is a viable strategy, it was in the first Starcraft. That Zerg massing too many forces to quickly? storm his miners, Toss going carriers? drop a tank on his minerals, Terrans getting ready for a push? sink a couple lurkers back there. All 3 races have the ability to do this, Reapers as you know jump up ridges, Stalkers can blink, and Roaches can move while burrowed, all of those units can be gotten in roughly the same amount of time as each other. The difference being Reapers aren't very tough units, you build a couple for early game harassment and then they become obsolete. There are plenty of effective counters that won't cripple you in the long haul, you're just being bitchy because now there's some kind of strange new early game strategy you weren't ready for.Grubnar said:I think the point is that it SHOULD NOT BE IN THE GAME!fanklok said:Of course I forgot the definition of douche in the RTS world meant someone who uses units for exactly what they were designed to do. A single Stalker/Marine/Hydra stops that from happening.Cyketor said:Well see it happens on every game, and most of all that I hate is when terran use the jet pack unit and fly's in behind you, destroys all your mining units and then leaves just to stunt your level growth, its a mess, just saying, when you wait 6 years for a game then its filled with douches then it kinda leave you with a bitter taste in your mouth.
When it says "Real-time strategy" on the box I expect to do some strategy, in real-time.
Now, StarCraft 2 may be real-time as opposed to turn based but dirt-farming is NOT a strategy!
The units in this game COULD make a decent strategy game, at least some of them. But there is SO MUCH missing from this game that is taken for granted in modern strategy games. Like flanking and terrain effect just to name two.
Second, you are totaly missing the point. I actually LIKE Reapers as a unit. They are a very strategic unit, a fast lightly armored recon/flanking unit. My problem is that there is no benefit to flanking in this game so they are not as useable as they could be.
And thirdly, there is nothing "new" or "strange" about base raiding. I have been playing RTS games on the PC for a decade and a half, the first Command & Conquer game had it back in '95.
But just because something is old does not make it good, in fact it is often the other way around. Maybe you should try out "World in Conflict" or "Company of Heroes" to better understand what I am trying to say here.
Have a nice day.
The problem is, you're bad. You've been thoroughly outplayed a few times, and instead of practicing and adapting, you've resorted to whining and insulting.
If you don't like the fast-paced gameplay of SC (note: this doesn't mean games have to be over quickly, it means you have to react, think, and play quickly), fair enough, but don't call other people morons and don't call the game itself bad, when the problem is evidently you.