Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Sell Out

kingcomrade

Kingcomrade
Edgy
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Messages
26,884
Location
Cognitive Elite HQ
My only problem with Starcraft's combat is fact that you can only select like 12 of your units at once, and using spells is a pain. Other than that, I don't really know what you mean about "combat." The units are awesome and you suck for saying otherwise. Except the hydralisk.

The missions are, like in every single RTS game ever made, utterly stupid, so I can understand that.
 

Naked_Lunch

Erudite
Joined
Jan 29, 2005
Messages
5,360
Location
Norway, 1967
The combat, at least to me, was more about choosing the right rock-paper-scissors combination and then flinging them into the enemy. IIRC it didn't have any options for flanking, or different formations, which I usually like to have in RTS games. It was very simple.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom