How low can you go? I've got 861 wins on CoH (All of them are automatches, so that means they're ranked), and just 189 losses. (37 have to do with connection problems / Drophackers )

Sheesh...

people like starcraft, people like CoH, who gives a rat's backside whether they agree about a game or not? Personally, I still enjoy playing SC and I'm loving SC2. It may not be showing the advances that other games have shown in the meantime, but it's still incredibly fun to play and I will thoroughly enjoy the game for years to come.

Let people have their opinion in stead of dismissing it as if they're living in the past. Some people may also enjoy Resistance 2 more than other shooters, while those other shooters may do a lot of things better. That doesn't mean their reasoning isn't valid, if they acutally love Resistance 2 more.

Opinions remain opinions, despite wanting people to accept one's own opinion as fact.

Let.It.Go

You also said it was more skill based, of which I've been waiting for examples.

Rickz0r: The micro-management in CoH is way better integrated.

KungKras: I assume that by "Better integrated", you mean "Less skill based"

Rickz0r: No. Infact, I mean the complete opposite.

All you do is post a link to over 100 CoH tutorial tips, and this is in response to being shown some specific SC 'videos' demonstrating micro-management in real matches.

The fact that it would take you this many posts of calling everyone who disagrees with you fanboys until you actually posted any kind of example is laughable.  Even more so that what you posted was the first link on google I found when searching for "Company of Heroes Strategies".  The whole reason I was waiting on you to show something is so I can see a specific example rather than having to wade through a plethora of videos until I'm impressed.  I gave you the benefit of the doubt and assumed you could direct us to a game showcasing such skill based play, and I've been disappointed.

Starcraft is a unique case IMO.

Arguably the only reason its gameplay ever got so deep, and the reason it's still being played today as much as it is, was because South Korea went batshit crazy over it - something nobody could've predicted, least of all Blizzard. Largely (if not solely) because of this, it's been patched for 12 years, and obviously is one of the most balanced RTS games ever made - hell, a game better be balanced if it's been worked on for over a decade. Kinda makes you wonder what one could've uncover in games like Total Annihilation, Dark Reign or the C&C games, had they had a country start worshipping them.

As for the topic:

Since I've played quite a bit of RTS games, it's hard for me to pick just one best RTS. So here's a bunch of 'em.

Single Player:

C&C Tiberian Dawn
C&C3: Tiberium Wars
Red Alert 2: Yuri's Revenge
Total Annihilation

X-Com: Apocalypse
Warcraft 3

Warhammer 40K: Dawn of War

Multiplayer:

Warcraft 3: DotA
Total Annihilation
Supreme Commander (even though I'm not that good at it)

DoW

Nobody seems to give any credit to World in Conflict. As RTS games go, it was the one that requires the most thought and teamwork. You only get 6 heavy units total, so it is important you don't get in a bad situation (you -> tanks and enemy -> helicopters for example) or to make sure you don't stand still long enough to get hit by artilery or air strikes.

The only reason I don't play the game religiously is cause most people online are horrible and I've never gotten too much into any online game.