Topic: My review of Warcraft III the board game and RTS strategies
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
This is my article for the next issue, I've taken care to watch for spelling errors and grammar mistakes (however as I reread it I notice things that word missed so I'm editing it over time) to avoid what happened when I submitted my BF2 article. However it is not completed yet.
Warcraft Board Game and RTS Mayhem By Blayne Bradley
You all know the game Warcraft III where you could control one of three races: Humans, Night Elves, Orcs, and the Undead. The goal was like in most RTS games to eliminate your enemies and/or accomplish preset goals. Each race had its own unique units and strategies, and Warcraft III became a popular game played by hundreds of thousands, and because it was so popular they were so bold to this: Transformed it into a board game. That?s right a board game and it is awesome. Good for 2-4 player games from ages 12 and up. Warcraft III the board game is a fun game and the rules are easy to learn and simulate the RTS genre of video games fairly well, using ?steps? in which all plays all complete a certain phase of the game at the same turn then proceed to the next phase.
Each player starts out with a certain amount of units (simulating the population limit), you harvest gold and wood like in the PC game and at the end of your turn spend it as you wish to train units, build buildings, or upgrade your units. Also, the games are pretty short only about an hour to two hours long depending on how quickly you?ve gotten the rules down tight, how fast you rush and finally how lucky your dice roles are. However, discussing how awesome the board game is, is NOT the point of the article but instead if we refer to the term ?rush? to discuss the roads to victory in Warcraft and most RTS games.
The keys to victory in any engagement will be always to anticipate your enemy?s manoeuvres, understanding your enemy is all-important for there is no teacher like the enemy, for only your enemy will teach you how to conquer; only your enemy can tell you where you are weak and only your enemy can make you stronger. Next, the second most important is your economy and maintaining you supply routes, in the case of Warcraft this means protecting your workers and utilize a large workforce to guarantee the ability to train a large army and to replace loses quickly. The third and final key to a successful strategy is positioning, your army if positioned correctly and if you utilize the terrain fully to your advantage you can prevent the enemy from doing his moves and prevent the execution of his strategy.
Now to go over the strategies used in Warcraft, Starcraft and pretty much every RTS out there that follows the same usually guidelines: a balanced number of races/factions, resource gathering, control over your own production, a certain basic diplomacy, the ability to research upgrades and a utilization of a tech tree. Most RTS games will follow those guidelines and the strategies we discuss should be valid in those cases.
Now no matter the RTS and no matter how complicated the strategy devised to annihilate the enemy the various strategies will all boil down to two basic decisions, and by extension everything you do should have only two possibly ways of responding, once the choices of response are reduced to one you?ve already won and if there?s three or more your not trying hard enough. However, those two basic decisions you start with are whether to rush or not to rush. That is the question. If you rush, you can scrape together an impressive force quickly and go straight for your enemies? base before he is ready to respond, or if you don?t rush you can concentrate on building an economy and out produce the enemy and win in the long run. After that all strategies should branch out along those two basic strategies and should branch out so that there can only be to possible choices your enemy can do in response.
posted
Why do you give the Orcs such short shrift? Sure, they don't have any good anti-air to speak of, but they are a good solid race in ground combat. Maybe you should mention them too.
Posts: 4548 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
whoops I was in a starcraft frame of mind when I was writing and I forgot there were 4 races in Warcraft nor 3, good thing this isn't published yet.
IP: Logged |
posted
The newest board game on the market is Warcraft. Based upon the popular RTS (Real Time Strategy) computer game, Warcraft III, the player takes control of one of four races with different units and strategies and attempts to accomplish mission goals and eliminate enemies. I have played this board game, and I can tell you that it is awesome. The rules are easy to learn and it provides an enjoyable simulation of one of my favorite video games.
Not that my version is perfect, that's just how I would write it.
What I think is that you write like you probably speak. Your writing seems very conversational - one can imagine you talking to someone like this - but it is much too informal for an article. Your sentences are too choppy and are often incomplete. I recommend that you use whole sentences, put the subject next to the verb, etc... Use complete thoughts and have an order to your article. Move from one thing to another, don't jump around. Ask yourself...WWOSCD? Posts: 561 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
World War Orsen Scott Card Diet.... Is that what that stands for...?
Btw, can I use your version for the intro?
IP: Logged |
posted
On my version, I would change "and attempts to" to "in order to" - it doesn't overload on "and".
Posts: 561 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
