🚀 go-pugleaf

"Walter Mitty" <mitt...@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:87hd3qx89j.fsf@news.europe.ch...
> "pigdos" <N...@nowhere.com> writes:
>
> Because you implement a strategy with that one unit?
>
> Do you think that tennis players, boxers or snooker players dont have a
> strategy when that play? Sure, they are more likely to be labelled as
> sports sims, but there is still strategy when controlling a single
> unit. Many times there are multiple units which you control one after
> the other : this is, again, controlling only one unit at a time.
>
>> I think we can still say Westwood developed the first RTS just because 
>> they
>> were the first to allow you to control multiple units (thus contributing 
>> to
>> the STRATEGY aspect of RTS). By your reasoning, Gauntlet was an

Walter hits the nail on the head. The term "strategy" doesn't say "thousands 
of units" or "huge scope", it merely states that this kind of game requires 
DECISION MAKING ON STRATEGIC LEVEL.

You have

- Operational level
- Management level
- Strategic level

Just like in any business.

Translate this to starcraft

Operation level = marine uses stimpack and shoots
Management level = Take those 2 expansions
Strategic level = Carrier-Arb-Obs combo with templar should do the finishing 
job, all the while pumping out fully upgraded goons as a decoy, defense, and 
cannon fodder.