>This is fundamental to micro in starcraft. Micro doesn't mean just moving units around. But also tactics, positioning, etc.
Blob sure is a good tactic. Positioning refers to on the battlefield, not in a group.
>This happens in every game of starcraft that goes longer than 5 minutes. Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it isn't there, silly buns.
You mean that they're NOT just using the same fucking strategies over and over again, changing nothing? could have fucking fooled me. There are a grand total of about 20-30 SC2 strategies that actually work, and only about half of those work well enough to be used competitively.
>The same principle holds in starcraft. Your units are out of position when you get attacked? Prepare to suffer big time. Actually this applies to every RTS except maybe warcraft 3 because lol town portal.
Nope, sorry, if you micro well enough at your base when it's being attacked, you can repel damn near anything short of an all out (every unit) rush attack, and even then you can sometimes repel that. In the example I was using, Distant Worlds, if 2 (fucking 2) enemy ships attack an undefended outpost, it's fucked. You can't get there fast enough to save it and you can't produce a ship strong enough to defend it fast enough. You are FUCKED.
>There's no reason to believe this is any different in starcraft. How many times have you seen one unit win a game? You haven't, and neither have I.
Go find the video of that 1 minute match. The guy's only unit won the entire game. The opponent coudn't adapt his strategy, and instead of doing the sensible thing (trying to win anyway), he surrendered.
>Part of the on-the-fly planning in starcraft involves adjusting your composition to counter your enemy's. Also choosing units that work well together. How is this supposed to be an argument against starcraft again? I'm pretty sure at this point you haven't even played it.
Played it, and this is not done in the same way as I am talking about. There is no "adjustment" in a competitive game of SC2, only what has been preplanned.
>A handful of units in starcraft deal friendly fire, such as siege tanks and psi storm. It's well known that a poorly positioned Terran army can have its siege tanks kill more friendly marines than enemies due to splash damage.
Every unit in TA can deal friendly fire, therefore unit placement is that many times more important.

on to post 2!

>Starcraft doesn't have sea, but that's hardly relevant.
It's another unit type, and handles differently from the others, but fine, whatever, I'll give you guys ONE point.
>You couldn't describe starcraft units better than that.
Not to the same degree. And it's more than just damages, it's movement speeds and types (momentum and shit) and manuverability. Every unit in SC2 moves roughly the same, and can stop on a dime.
>Certain compositions dominate in choke points; you can't see high ground from low ground without a flyer to spot. Certain compositions, like many of the Zerg's, are best when flanking from all directions.
Imagine this times about 5, that's TA. Also there are very few artificial choke points, so you have to make your own using structures, adding another layer of complexity.
>This is the only legitimate argument against starcraft you've posted so far. Good job.
Not the only one, but I respect you for not trying to debate this. Retards have tried and failed.
>Everything except one.
See above.
>If the game is fairly matched, nobody will win the first battle and it will get more technical from there.
Rarely happens, and even when it does, it's just a continuation of the cookie-cutter strategies of before.
>Those games do happen. But rarely. It just means you have to be on your toes the entire game.
Point being he shouldn't have given up, and wouldn't have if it wasn't SC2, and more viable strategies were available.

Going to bed now, work in the morning. Shine on /v/, you unfun autist bastards, shine on.