It seems the experienced players of World in Conflict whine too much.

[vlad321]

Slimebeast said:

Squilliam said:
Age of Empires 3 had this problem. Often when a particular race or strategy was overpowered it just didn't make for a fun game. You had some pretty average players beating some excellent players just from using a particular civilization.

 

Same with Age of Empires II (actually all games are unbalanced in one way or other).

I agree - I feel that using the most effective strategy (usually the overpowered one) is often kinda cheap and lame. So basically I disagree with the other guys in this thread. I don't think saying "it's there for a reason" is accurate, because often games simply ARE imbalanced (because a perfect balanced RTS is extremely hard to design, so I don't automatically blame the devs).

I'm one of those people who often oppose of people using rush tactics. I'm perfectly fine with rushing in maps that are designed for rushing as a viable strategy to make the map fun, but there are maps where it's obvious that the designer - or the players - intended the map to be played with other strategies. In those cases when people still uses the rush I think it's cheap, and I whine.

In all RTS games I've ever played rushing is always an overpowered stragey and that kinda pisses me off. And since rushing also happens to be the strategy that demands the highest skill, you get a devastating double effect:

the skilled players are using the overpowered strat.

 

No... Just no. Rushing is NOT overpowered. It''s only overpowered if you don't know how to counter it. There is no spcial cc maps at all. As bdbdbd said, if you counter a rush, then you have a huge upper hand. I bet you those same experienced players won't go down by a simple rush themselves.