Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

WC3/AoE... NWTR/Michi

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
August 28, 2005 12:43:35 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

I recently noticed how similar these two major real-time strategy
RTS favorite maps are.

Age of Empires Conquerors Michi and WarCraft III "No Where to Run,
Nowhere to Hide".

.... Both are almost always played by teams. The WC3 map was played
2v2 and the Age of Empires map is up to 4v4.

.... Both sides start separated by a row of trees. In WC3, partners
were on the same side but separated by a row of trees. In Michi,
partners are on the same side, but no trees separate.

.... Both start by placing watchtowers along the tree-line and (in
Michi) if you expect a long game you should start cutting trees
forward just like you do in NWTR (in NWTR it was critical to do so).

....In NWTR, getting your troops in between the opponents town hall
and mine is similar to Michi's stopping the flow of trade carts
between your opponent's markets.

More about : wc3 aoe nwtr michi

Anonymous
August 28, 2005 4:56:00 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 20:43:35 GMT, John Doe wrote:

> I recently noticed how similar these two major real-time strategy
> RTS favorite maps are.

Actually, most RTS games seem to be very similar, period. With the notable
exception of Kohan2:Kings of War and Warhammer:D awn of War, all popular RTS
games seem to be "more of the same". If you played one, you know all of
them.

Perhaps that's just me, though.

M.
Anonymous
August 28, 2005 4:56:01 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"Michael Vondung" <mvondung@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1joppt0hq9sqn$.1q6xxdmw00sum.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 20:43:35 GMT, John Doe wrote:
>
>> I recently noticed how similar these two major real-time strategy
>> RTS favorite maps are.
>
> Actually, most RTS games seem to be very similar, period. With the notable
> exception of Kohan2:Kings of War and Warhammer:D awn of War, all popular
> RTS
> games seem to be "more of the same". If you played one, you know all of
> them.
>
> Perhaps that's just me, though.
>
> M.

Everyone should just stick to chess and save their money.
Related resources
Anonymous
August 28, 2005 4:56:02 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"Grackle" <nowhere@lalaland.ca> wrote:
> "Michael Vondung" <mvondung@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 20:43:35 GMT, John Doe wrote:

>>> I recently noticed how similar these two major real-time
>>> strategy RTS favorite maps are.

>> Actually, most RTS games seem to be very similar, period.

They are a lot like super speed chess, but it's not a bad thing if
you can tame the mouse fight and enjoy very deep strategy gaming.

>> With the notable exception of Kohan2:Kings of War and
>> Warhammer:D awn of War, all popular RTS games seem to be "more
>> of the same". If you played one, you know all of them. Perhaps
>> that's just me, though.

> Everyone should just stick to chess and save their money.

I was the best chess player out of 3000 high school students. At
the same time, I played for a short while in USCF tournaments. I
loved chess, played night and day.

My first real-time strategy was WarCraft II. I was fascinated. The
resemblance to chess was crystal clear.

Real-time strategy is chess all over again except on an infinitely
more complex scale. If you can tame the click fest so that your
mouse slinger opponents cannot overwhelm your strategy, you can
enjoy the game as if it were chess, but on a much higher level.
Granted, few people can do that.

And speaking of, people are joining my game. Later.
Anonymous
August 28, 2005 11:55:19 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"John Doe" <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns96BFC4D61B8DFwisdomfolly@207.115.63.158...
> "Grackle" <nowhere@lalaland.ca> wrote:
>
>> Everyone should just stick to chess and save their money.
>
> I was the best chess player out of 3000 high school students. At
> the same time, I played for a short while in USCF tournaments. I
> loved chess, played night and day.
>
> My first real-time strategy was WarCraft II. I was fascinated. The
> resemblance to chess was crystal clear.
>
> Real-time strategy is chess all over again except on an infinitely
> more complex scale. If you can tame the click fest so that your
> mouse slinger opponents cannot overwhelm your strategy, you can
> enjoy the game as if it were chess, but on a much higher level.
> Granted, few people can do that.
>

I disagree that RTS games can attain a higher (strategic) level than chess.
They are always tuned towards entertainment value, not subtle strategy. If
anything deep arises from an RTS it's usually short-lived until a 'balance'
flaw in the design is discovered and exploited. In one game it's
overloading the map with guard towers, in another it's overloading your army
with a particular type of unit. But maybe that's not a problem because by
the time exploits become the main strategy, most players will have moved on
to the next new game. But they are all flawed in one way or another.
That's not to say they aren't fun.
Anonymous
August 28, 2005 12:32:23 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"John Doe" <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns96BF9FFBB4267wisdomfolly@207.115.63.158...
> I recently noticed how similar these two major real-time strategy
> RTS favorite maps are.
>
> Age of Empires Conquerors Michi and WarCraft III "No Where to Run,
> Nowhere to Hide".

Uh... you do know that Nowhere to Run is actually a remake of a Warcraft 2
map, yes? The idea of isolating the players is not new, nor was it
particularly inventive even when it was new. In some cases, it's not trees,
but water that serves as the barrier. Oh the devilishness!
Anonymous
August 28, 2005 11:06:55 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"Grackle" <nowhere@lalaland.ca> wrote:
> "John Doe" <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
>> "Grackle" <nowhere@lalaland.ca> wrote:

>>> Everyone should just stick to chess and save their money.

>> I was the best chess player out of 3000 high school students.
>> At the same time, I played for a short while in USCF
>> tournaments. I loved chess, played night and day. My first
>> real-time strategy was WarCraft II. I was fascinated. The
>> resemblance to chess was crystal clear. Real-time strategy is
>> chess all over again except on an infinitely more complex
>> scale. If you can tame the click fest so that your mouse
>> slinger opponents cannot overwhelm your strategy, you can enjoy
>> the game as if it were chess, but on a much higher level.
>> Granted, few people can do that.

> I disagree that RTS games can attain a higher (strategic) level
> than chess.

Anything which more closely resembles reality attains a higher
strategic level. If you can't see that, I question your insight.

Needless to say, the inventor(s) of chess did a marvelous job of
simulating reality, given a playing field with 64 squares.

> They are always tuned towards entertainment value,

Such is a game.

> not subtle strategy.

Little do you know.

> If anything deep arises from an RTS it's usually short-lived
> until a 'balance' flaw in the design is discovered and
> exploited. In one game it's overloading the map with guard
> towers, in another it's overloading your army with a particular
> type of unit. But maybe that's not a problem because by the
> time exploits become the main strategy, most players will have
> moved on to the next new game.

Play me in a game of Age of Empires and show me the exploits
you're talking about.

But in fact, the problem is your inability to cope with the
mouse/input skills. Your frustration rises out of that. I know
exactly where you're coming from.

> But they are all flawed in one way or another.

That fits just about everything in life. For example, in reality
rooks shouldn't even move.





>
>
>
>
>
> Path: newssvr22.news.prodigy.net!newsdbm02.news.prodigy.com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nf3.bellglobal.com!nf1.bellglobal.com!nf2.bellglobal.com!news20.bellglobal.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
> From: "Grackle" <nowhere@lalaland.ca>
> Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
> References: <Xns96BF9FFBB4267wisdomfolly@207.115.63.158> <1joppt0hq9sqn$.1q6xxdmw00sum.dlg@40tude.net> <HZ6Qe.2246$Ld.540588@news20.bellglobal.com> <Xns96BFC4D61B8DFwisdomfolly@207.115.63.158>
> Subject: Re: WC3/AoE... NWTR/Michi
> Lines: 31
> X-Priority: 3
> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
> X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
> Message-ID: <CChQe.36$884.11811@news20.bellglobal.com>
> Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 07:55:19 -0400
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.94.169.199
> X-Complaints-To: abuse@sympatico.ca
> X-Trace: news20.bellglobal.com 1125230114 65.94.169.199 (Sun, 28 Aug 2005 07:55:14 EDT)
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 07:55:14 EDT
> Organization: Bell Sympatico
> Xref: newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic:855552
>
Anonymous
August 28, 2005 11:20:43 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"Kevin C." <nomail@dot.com> wrote:
> "John Doe" <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message

>> I recently noticed how similar these two major real-time
>> strategy RTS favorite maps are.
>> Age of Empires Conquerors Michi and WarCraft III "No Where to
>> Run, Nowhere to Hide".

> Uh... you do know that Nowhere to Run is actually a remake of a
> Warcraft 2 map, yes?

Sorry, I meant to say WarCraft II. Yes I know, I played NWTR
almost exclusively.

> The idea of isolating the players is not new, nor was it
> particularly inventive even when it was new.

I don't recall saying it was new or inventive. It (NWTR) was
brilliant and that map type remains popular.

> In some cases, it's not trees,
> but water that serves as the barrier. Oh the devilishness!

Water is very different from trees. I think there are some Age of
Empires players who might like to play a similar Michi map with a
water divide, but no one cares.
Anonymous
August 29, 2005 1:41:54 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"John Doe" <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns96C08F97DF7D9wisdomfolly@207.115.63.158...
>
> Play me in a game of Age of Empires and show me the exploits
> you're talking about.
>

I played that game to death online and am sick of it and its clones, but I
don't remember the details of its flaws. Go look it up. I would never
reinstall it to prove a point, or even to beat you.

> But in fact, the problem is your inability to cope with the
> mouse/input skills. Your frustration rises out of that. I know
> exactly where you're coming from.

AoE was a click-fest, and playing it well was a matter of getting the timing
down to a mechanical perfection. What you might interpret as skill is
actually efficiency through repetition. I know all about having to produce
and assign the exact number of villagers to whatever resources, ect... Your
arrogance hasn't got much to stand on.

>> But they are all flawed in one way or another.
>
> That fits just about everything in life. For example, in reality
> rooks shouldn't even move.

Yes, and mounted knights don't move in L patterns. So what's your point?
Anonymous
August 29, 2005 11:16:52 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"Grackle" <nowhere lalaland.ca> wrote:
> "John Doe" <jdoe usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message

>> Play me in a game of Age of Empires and show me the exploits
>> you're talking about.

> I played that game to death online and am sick of it and its
> clones, but I don't remember the details of its flaws. Go look
> it up. I would never reinstall it to prove a point, or even to
> beat you.

You are all talk.

>> But in fact, the problem is your inability to cope with the
>> mouse/input skills. Your frustration rises out of that. I know
>> exactly where you're coming from.

> AoE was a click-fest, and playing it well was a matter of
> getting the timing down to a mechanical perfection. What you
> might interpret as skill is actually efficiency through
> repetition.

You can't handle the input, so you twist reality to convince
yourself that the game is undesirable.

> I know all about having to produce and assign the exact number
> of villagers to whatever resources, ect... Your arrogance
> hasn't got much to stand on.

Arrogance is like when you think your misperception should be
applied to everyone.

>>> But they are all flawed in one way or another.
>>
>> That fits just about everything in life. For example, in
>> reality rooks shouldn't even move.
>
> Yes, and mounted knights don't move in L patterns. So what's
> your point?

You are just a troll.




>
>
>
>
> Path: newssvr17.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm02.news.prodigy.com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newscon02.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!wns14feed!worldnet.att.net!207.35.177.252!nf3.bellglobal.com!nf1.bellglobal.com!nf2.bellglobal.com!news20.bellglobal.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
> From: "Grackle" <nowhere lalaland.ca>
> Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
> References: <Xns96BF9FFBB4267wisdomfolly 207.115.63.158> <1joppt0hq9sqn$.1q6xxdmw00sum.dlg 40tude.net> <HZ6Qe.2246$Ld.540588 news20.bellglobal.com> <Xns96BFC4D61B8DFwisdomfolly 207.115.63.158> <CChQe.36$884.11811 news20.bellglobal.com> <Xns96C08F97DF7D9wisdomfolly 207.115.63.158>
> Subject: Re: WC3/AoE... NWTR/Michi
> Lines: 30
> X-Priority: 3
> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
> X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
> Message-ID: <wJtQe.459$2F1.92107 news20.bellglobal.com>
> Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 21:41:54 -0400
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.94.163.173
> X-Complaints-To: abuse sympatico.ca
> X-Trace: news20.bellglobal.com 1125279708 65.94.163.173 (Sun, 28 Aug 2005 21:41:48 EDT)
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 21:41:48 EDT
> Organization: Bell Sympatico
> Xref: newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic:855573
>
>
Anonymous
August 30, 2005 2:16:59 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"John Doe" <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns96C11735E51D5wisdomfolly@207.115.63.158...
> "Grackle" <nowhere lalaland.ca> wrote:
>> "John Doe" <jdoe usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
>
>
> <snip>
<totally irelavent what Doe-Nut was yapping>
> <snip>
>
>
> You are just a troll.
>

Only imbeciles keep feeding the trolls.
But I have a feeling you have to have the last word, in which case you
confirm my point.
Resist, resist, if you can!
Anonymous
September 1, 2005 5:26:26 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

John Doe wrote:
> "Kevin C." <nomail@dot.com> wrote:
>
>>"John Doe" <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message
>
>
>>>I recently noticed how similar these two major real-time
>>>strategy RTS favorite maps are.
>>>Age of Empires Conquerors Michi and WarCraft III "No Where to
>>>Run, Nowhere to Hide".
>
>
>>Uh... you do know that Nowhere to Run is actually a remake of a
>>Warcraft 2 map, yes?
>
>
> Sorry, I meant to say WarCraft II. Yes I know, I played NWTR
> almost exclusively.
>
>
>>The idea of isolating the players is not new, nor was it
>>particularly inventive even when it was new.
>
>
> I don't recall saying it was new or inventive. It (NWTR) was
> brilliant and that map type remains popular.
>
>
>>In some cases, it's not trees,
>>but water that serves as the barrier. Oh the devilishness!
>
>
> Water is very different from trees. I think there are some Age of
> Empires players who might like to play a similar Michi map with a
> water divide, but no one cares.

I've played several island-based Age of Empires I MP games. As long as
no one gets rushed by an early landing, they tend to turn into really
long slugfests right up to the point all the forests are cut down and
the wood runs out.

Rush-building harbours and ships is very easy, and no one can have more
than 200 units, so defense has a huge advantage. They can rebuild a
sunkfleet and sink the attacking armada in one fell swoop while the
attacker can't reinforce the front line at all.

--
Leons Petrazickis
import java.lang.Disclaimer;
http://slashdot.org/~LPetrazickis/journal/
!