I'm a bit late to the Warcraft 3 party ??

[WT]

Just picked up Warcraft 3 and the expansion pack .. yeaa, I know .. welcome to 2002, dude !!
A lil background on me, but I have been playing PC game since '89, back when most games were flight sims .. and we were HAPPY WITH THAT !!!

Other games I was playing:

Lakers vs. Celtics - (EGA in all its 16bit glory !!) Note to the young'uns .. its not a typo .. I meant EGA, NOT eVGA

Battle of Britain: Their Finest Hour - 497 confirmed kills, and I was only shot down 3 times !

So, on to Warcraft ... 1 that is ... the DOS version !! I refused to use up my meager 16mb of RAM to play a stupid game in Windows, so I bought the DOS version !! Played the hell out of the game, but eventually moved on. So I kept eying up the Battle Chest pack, and finally picked it up.

So, AT gaming faithful .. what do I do to enjoy this game ? I've already patched it and added widescreen support, so is there anything else I need to do to have fun playing it ?

 

[TheVrolok]

I still play normal games on B.net and dota here and there.

 

[AstroManLuca]

Custom game types. DotA (Defense of the Ancients) is very popular, as is Footmen Frenzy. I don't personally like them but some do. There are also a lot of tower defense games and other things like battleships, battle tanks, and so on.

 

[tvdang7]

What u need to do right away is play the DOTA map/mod. its the best game ever created.

 

[Newbian]

Player a decent tower defense game.

I never did care for DOTA ones.

 

[TidusZ]

I picked it up on release day back in summer 2003, within a week I found the custom games were more fun than the melee. Try some of the custom games, especially defence of the ancients. Lots of fun waiting to be had there. Tower defences are great too and easy to pick up.

 

[guitarslingerchris]

Tower Defense! TD is definitely awesome, you should also try Tides of Blood. Personally I never got into DOTA, but I did like Tides of Blood alot and I think it is a good alternative if you don't mind it being unbalanced somewhat.

 

[Kromis]

No, you are not late to the party.

In fact, the majority of the "party" is playing DOTA. That's the main reason why I stopped playing War3.

 

[Udgnim]

either play single player campaign or DotA

I don't know how active the non-DotA community is

 

[ibex333]

I didn't like Warcraft 3 much beyond the single player campaign which was excellent, on par with other blizzard's offerings. And yes, I admit it, a large part of the reason is because I was constantly getting owned in multilayer. But I refuse to say that I lost because I suck. No, that's not the reason at all. It's the game that sucks. I do just fine in Warhammer: Dawn of War, Starcraft, Company of Heroes, and Command and Conquer 3 - not a pro player by a long shot, not even an expert, but I can win, and it's not too rare that I do! And why is that, you might think... Well, it's because none of these games are focused around those STUPID heroes! Moreover, the battles are way too fast paced for a game that requires such a ridiculous amount of micromanagement. Being able to utilize your units and heroes abilities and items during battle is key in WCIII, but it's extremely hard given how fast battles play out. Very often I ended up losing 80-90% of my army that numbered in two-three dozen in 10-12 seconds, because I simply couldn't click on the ability fast enough in the heat of battle or my hero was at the wrong place in the wrong time.

Why should I lose the battle, and very likely the game, just because I lost my hero? Seriously it's retarded. A hero can get killed in mere SECONDS by focus fire from hyppogryphs, archers and whatnot. At times it happened so fast that I was left with an open mouth wondering what the hell just happened, and STILL couldn't understand it, as the teenager that just slaughtered me was sitting on the other end smirking, and calling me a nOOb.

When a hero is lost, usually the chances of winning are remote, because:

a)The enemy gained all that experience which will be difficult or impossible for you to catch up to depending on the level of your hero when he/she died.
b)It might take quite a long time for you to res your hero especially if he/she was very high level at time of death giving the enemy a chance to creep freely, gaining ahead of you in exp or wreak havok on your base army, with you being powerless to stop his higer level hero.
c)A hero is EVERYTHING in WCIII, an army with a hero in it will almost always beat an army with no hero, often even if the heroless army is superior in numbers.
d)It isn't always true, especially in the beginning to mid game but very often, after losing your hero once, you might as well just quit the game because you are already lost. No reason to continue and try to rebound back from your loss since it will only be a waste of your time, which you could have used to start a new game.

None of these points are a factor in other strategy games. Lost an army? No problem! Build a new one and if you play your cards right you have a good chance to bounce back. There is no KEY unit per se to worry about, all units are quite capable in their roles and form a formidable war machine when used together. Off course some units are better/more expencive than others and can very well decide battles, but they are by far not as important as heroes are in WCIII.

Many people love WCIII because of mods such as DOTA, but I'm not into mods.... much.

 

[TidusZ]

Originally posted by: ibex333
I didn't like Warcraft 3 much beyond the single player campaign which was excellent, on par with other blizzard's offerings. And yes, I admit it, a large part of the reason is because I was constantly getting owned in multilayer. But I refuse to say that I lost because I suck. No, that's not the reason at all. It's the game that sucks. I do just fine in Warhammer: Dawn of War, Starcraft, Company of Heroes, and Command and Conquer 3 - not a pro player by a long shot, not even an expert, but I can win, and it's not too rare that I do! And why is that, you might think... Well, it's because none of these games are focused around those STUPID heroes! Moreover, the battles are way too fast paced for a game that requires such a ridiculous amount of micromanagement. Being able to utilize your units and heroes abilities and items during battle is key in WCIII, but it's extremely hard given how fast battles play out. Very often I ended up losing 80-90% of my army that numbered in two-three dozen in 10-12 seconds, because I simply couldn't click on the ability fast enough in the heat of battle or my hero was at the wrong place in the wrong time.

Why should I lose the battle, and very likely the game, just because I lost my hero? Seriously it's retarded. A hero can get killed in mere SECONDS by focus fire from hyppogryphs, archers and whatnot. At times it happened so fast that I was left with an open mouth wondering what the hell just happened, and STILL couldn't understand it, as the teenager that just slaughtered me was sitting on the other end smirking, and calling me a nOOb.

When a hero is lost, usually the chances of winning are remote, because:

a)The enemy gained all that experience which will be difficult or impossible for you to catch up to depending on the level of your hero when he/she died.
b)It might take quite a long time for you to res your hero especially if he/she was very high level at time of death giving the enemy a chance to creep freely, gaining ahead of you in exp or wreak havok on your base army, with you being powerless to stop his higer level hero.
c)A hero is EVERYTHING in WCIII, an army with a hero in it will almost always beat an army with no hero, often even if the heroless army is superior in numbers.
d)It isn't always true, especially in the beginning to mid game but very often, after losing your hero once, you might as well just quit the game because you are already lost. No reason to continue and try to rebound back from your loss since it will only be a waste of your time, which you could have used to start a new game.

None of these points are a factor in other strategy games. Lost an army? No problem! Build a new one and if you play your cards right you have a good chance to bounce back. There is no KEY unit per se to worry about, all units are quite capable in their roles and form a formidable war machine when used together. Off course some units are better/more expencive than others and can very well decide battles, but they are by far not as important as heroes are in WCIII.

Many people love WCIII because of mods such as DOTA, but I'm not into mods.... much.

If you wanna try an amazing rts where the winner is based on skill look at supreme commander / forged alliance. If you get godly at that game you can play 5 hours a day for a week and not lose a game. Its got more focus on the overall strategy than on microing individual battles. You still need to micro but theres at least just as much macro too. I think of it as a strategy game for rts players whereas many others you listed are strategy games for fps/action players. You do win by killing the other players commander though, sorta like a hero, but it simply works.

 

[WT]

Well, just finished my first game. on Normal mode, I got absolutely CRUSHED ! This was just a quick 1 on 1 scenario against the CPU, and it was fugly. I have no idea what the various strengths of each unit are, so I resorted to my ever near and dear to my heart CHEAT CODES ! Game is now enjoyable, and I only spring a cheat code when I really need it. I won't be playing online (ever ! I've managed to play Comp. of Heroes offline only for over 2 years now) so its a nice diversion from CoH until Tale of Valor comes out in two weeks. Even then, I hate the fact that they removed the base building aspect of that game.

 

[TidusZ]

Why no multiplayer? Restricting yourself to singleplayer wc3.. that's like getting a trophy wife and then taking a vow of celibacy.

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: TidusZ
Why no multiplayer? Restricting yourself to singleplayer wc3.. that's like getting a trophy wife and then taking a vow of celibacy.

At least you won't get stuck with child support.

 

[TidusZ]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: TidusZ
Why no multiplayer? Restricting yourself to singleplayer wc3.. that's like getting a trophy wife and then taking a vow of celibacy.

At least you won't get stuck with child support.

Dude, the first rule of trophy wives is to have a prenumptial agreement in place. Additionally, having kids would just defeat the purpose (and who wants to have kids). No no no.

 

[WT]

Why no MP ??? Uhh, multiple kids in the house sleeping when I can play plus family commitments ? We can spot you guys with no wife or kids a mile away with those comments !

With three kids in the house, my only gaming time is after 8:30 PM, and that's not every night, more like 2-3 times a week, so I don't have a set time that I can sit and guarantee I can be able to play a full game. I like the idea of being able to play for only 30 minutes if that's all I have, and it usually is !! I have mastered the art of defeating the CPU side in Comp. of Heroes in less than 30 minutes at this point.

 

[AstroManLuca]

Originally posted by: WT
Why no MP ??? Uhh, multiple kids in the house sleeping when I can play plus family commitments ? We can spot you guys with no wife or kids a mile away with those comments !

With three kids in the house, my only gaming time is after 8:30 PM, and that's not every night, more like 2-3 times a week, so I don't have a set time that I can sit and guarantee I can be able to play a full game. I like the idea of being able to play for only 30 minutes if that's all I have, and it usually is !! I have mastered the art of defeating the CPU side in Comp. of Heroes in less than 30 minutes at this point.

You can play an online game in less than 30 minutes. Lots of people leave early from online games anyway... in many cases, the game is already decided within five minutes and from that point it's just a matter of letting it actually happen.

 

[ViviTheMage]

Tower Defense games were awesome in WC3, and still are actually...guess i'll have to go fire that up when I get home....thanks!!

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Warcraft 3 was amazing...back in 2002. I used to play on battle.net a ton, watch all of the top players' replays...all that fun stuff!

It does seem that the games are decided in the first five minutes or so. If you don't have the right build order, and don't manage your hero well enough (don't creep fast enough, lose your hero, etc.) then the game is effectively over. The first player to lose their main hero usually ends up being the loser. Nine times out of ten!

 

[AstroManLuca]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
Warcraft 3 was amazing...back in 2002. I used to play on battle.net a ton, watch all of the top players' replays...all that fun stuff!

It does seem that the games are decided in the first five minutes or so. If you don't have the right build order, and don't manage your hero well enough (don't creep fast enough, lose your hero, etc.) then the game is effectively over. The first player to lose their main hero usually ends up being the loser. Nine times out of ten!

Indeed. This is why I hate standard War3 and why I suck at Footmen Frenzy. It requires SO much micro. You have to get really good at tactical moves to surround the enemy hero, and you have to learn all your hero's abilities (which takes a long time!). And of course there's the low limit of how many units you can select at a time.

 

[Edge1]

Originally posted by: WT
Why no MP ??? Uhh, multiple kids in the house sleeping when I can play plus family commitments ? We can spot you guys with no wife or kids a mile away with those comments !

With three kids in the house, my only gaming time is after 8:30 PM, and that's not every night, more like 2-3 times a week, so I don't have a set time that I can sit and guarantee I can be able to play a full game. I like the idea of being able to play for only 30 minutes if that's all I have, and it usually is !! I have mastered the art of defeating the CPU side in Comp. of Heroes in less than 30 minutes at this point.

Dude, you are not alone. That describes me to a tee. I stick to single player only (sacrelig!) and still enjoy gaming very much. Beating the SP in games is enough for me, then I move on. Too many games, definitely too little time.

I started WC3 a year or two ago, and enjoyed it, but got sidetracked by a PC rebuild. I will revisit it for sure. I like trying different genres, and am playing around with fantasy TBS atm. Not sure its my cup of tea though. Enjoy Racing/RTS/FPS primarily, but not ruling anything out. RPG not bad, just need to take time to "get into" those kind of games.

 

[evident]

bro. i've been playing war3 for the last 6 years. I have not found a game since it came out that can replace it. best RTS out there right now. if anyone still plays this game on bnet let me know.

 

[evident]

Originally posted by: Kromis
No, you are not late to the party.

In fact, the majority of the "party" is playing DOTA. That's the main reason why I stopped playing War3.

no way! while there are alot of dota players, i can find a standard game in less than a minute still on US EAST. still lots of good competition out there too.

 

[Majes]

I didn't like Warcraft 3 much beyond the single player campaign which was excellent, on par with other blizzard's offerings. And yes, I admit it, a large part of the reason is because I was constantly getting owned in multilayer. But I refuse to say that I lost because I suck. No, that's not the reason at all. It's the game that sucks. I do just fine in Warhammer: Dawn of War, Starcraft, Company of Heroes, and Command and Conquer 3 - not a pro player by a long shot, not even an expert, but I can win, and it's not too rare that I do! And why is that, you might think... Well, it's because none of these games are focused around those STUPID heroes! Moreover, the battles are way too fast paced for a game that requires such a ridiculous amount of micromanagement. Being able to utilize your units and heroes abilities and items during battle is key in WCIII, but it's extremely hard given how fast battles play out. Very often I ended up losing 80-90% of my army that numbered in two-three dozen in 10-12 seconds, because I simply couldn't click on the ability fast enough in the heat of battle or my hero was at the wrong place in the wrong time. Why should I lose the battle, and very likely the game, just because I lost my hero? Seriously it's retarded. A hero can get killed in mere SECONDS by focus fire from hyppogryphs, archers and whatnot. At times it happened so fast that I was left with an open mouth wondering what the hell just happened, and STILL couldn't understand it, as the teenager that just slaughtered me was sitting on the other end smirking, and calling me a nOOb. When a hero is lost, usually the chances of winning are remote, because: a)The enemy gained all that experience which will be difficult or impossible for you to catch up to depending on the level of your hero when he/she died. b)It might take quite a long time for you to res your hero especially if he/she was very high level at time of death giving the enemy a chance to creep freely, gaining ahead of you in exp or wreak havok on your base army, with you being powerless to stop his higer level hero. c)A hero is EVERYTHING in WCIII, an army with a hero in it will almost always beat an army with no hero, often even if the heroless army is superior in numbers. d)It isn't always true, especially in the beginning to mid game but very often, after losing your hero once, you might as well just quit the game because you are already lost. No reason to continue and try to rebound back from your loss since it will only be a waste of your time, which you could have used to start a new game. None of these points are a factor in other strategy games. Lost an army? No problem! Build a new one and if you play your cards right you have a good chance to bounce back. There is no KEY unit per se to worry about, all units are quite capable in their roles and form a formidable war machine when used together. Off course some units are better/more expencive than others and can very well decide battles, but they are by far not as important as heroes are in WCIII. Many people love WCIII because of mods such as DOTA, but I'm not into mods.... much.

The above is the reason Warcraft three was hailed as Role playing strategy and not just real time strategy.

I played W3 for two years at a 30% win percentage.
Then I realized that it couldnt be played like starcraft.

It truly is a game that revolves around the heroes. There are various strats such as protocall that negate single heroes effect on the game, but overall heroes are what the game centers around. I went from being a really bad RT player to regularly making final 8 in single player tournaments.

The first thing you need to do is figure out a build order. If you dont get a good one then the other players will always have a unit advantage over you. Play some RT, meet some friends, get rocked in AT, play solo. That's basically how I learned. Random Team games are always a mass of confusion panic and swearing. They are fun. Arranged team is much harder, but you feel really good when you win. Solo is the ultimate challenge and an absolute blast.

However, the melee side of things has been on a decline and there aren't many new players because of the extreme learning curve. So for customs you could play DOTA, but its more boring than melee. I prefer playing Castle Fight or TDs. But for me melee is always what I will remember.

 

[evident]

Originally posted by: Majes

I didn't like Warcraft 3 much beyond the single player campaign which was excellent, on par with other blizzard's offerings. And yes, I admit it, a large part of the reason is because I was constantly getting owned in multilayer. But I refuse to say that I lost because I suck. No, that's not the reason at all. It's the game that sucks. I do just fine in Warhammer: Dawn of War, Starcraft, Company of Heroes, and Command and Conquer 3 - not a pro player by a long shot, not even an expert, but I can win, and it's not too rare that I do! And why is that, you might think... Well, it's because none of these games are focused around those STUPID heroes! Moreover, the battles are way too fast paced for a game that requires such a ridiculous amount of micromanagement. Being able to utilize your units and heroes abilities and items during battle is key in WCIII, but it's extremely hard given how fast battles play out. Very often I ended up losing 80-90% of my army that numbered in two-three dozen in 10-12 seconds, because I simply couldn't click on the ability fast enough in the heat of battle or my hero was at the wrong place in the wrong time. Why should I lose the battle, and very likely the game, just because I lost my hero? Seriously it's retarded. A hero can get killed in mere SECONDS by focus fire from hyppogryphs, archers and whatnot. At times it happened so fast that I was left with an open mouth wondering what the hell just happened, and STILL couldn't understand it, as the teenager that just slaughtered me was sitting on the other end smirking, and calling me a nOOb. When a hero is lost, usually the chances of winning are remote, because: a)The enemy gained all that experience which will be difficult or impossible for you to catch up to depending on the level of your hero when he/she died. b)It might take quite a long time for you to res your hero especially if he/she was very high level at time of death giving the enemy a chance to creep freely, gaining ahead of you in exp or wreak havok on your base army, with you being powerless to stop his higer level hero. c)A hero is EVERYTHING in WCIII, an army with a hero in it will almost always beat an army with no hero, often even if the heroless army is superior in numbers. d)It isn't always true, especially in the beginning to mid game but very often, after losing your hero once, you might as well just quit the game because you are already lost. No reason to continue and try to rebound back from your loss since it will only be a waste of your time, which you could have used to start a new game. None of these points are a factor in other strategy games. Lost an army? No problem! Build a new one and if you play your cards right you have a good chance to bounce back. There is no KEY unit per se to worry about, all units are quite capable in their roles and form a formidable war machine when used together. Off course some units are better/more expencive than others and can very well decide battles, but they are by far not as important as heroes are in WCIII. Many people love WCIII because of mods such as DOTA, but I'm not into mods.... much.

The above is the reason Warcraft three was hailed as Role playing strategy and not just real time strategy.

I played W3 for two years at a 30% win percentage.
Then I realized that it couldnt be played like starcraft.

It truly is a game that revolves around the heroes. There are various strats such as protocall that negate single heroes effect on the game, but overall heroes are what the game centers around. I went from being a really bad RT player to regularly making final 8 in single player tournaments.

The first thing you need to do is figure out a build order. If you dont get a good one then the other players will always have a unit advantage over you. Play some RT, meet some friends, get rocked in AT, play solo. That's basically how I learned. Random Team games are always a mass of confusion panic and swearing. They are fun. Arranged team is much harder, but you feel really good when you win. Solo is the ultimate challenge and an absolute blast.

However, the melee side of things has been on a decline and there aren't many new players because of the extreme learning curve. So for customs you could play DOTA, but its more boring than melee. I prefer playing Castle Fight or TDs. But for me melee is always what I will remember.

alot of people bitch and complain because you can't just mass up units and invade like in starcraft or some of the newer rts games. you have no choice but to micro your hero. there are a plethora of strats and techniques that are used to screw your enemies over as well. they are hard to learn, but once you figure it out, it's a perfect balance of twitch micro and overall strategy.

it's what makes the game so brilliant and better than all the other RTS games out there right now. it's different and it has a tougher learning curve i think.