Doing so netted you XP and item drops that could modify your heroвЂ™s base stats. The level system encouraged players to push out, explore the map and wipe out minor enemies called creeps. Heroes could be levelled up, accessing new or upgraded abilities as the match wore on. They made for strategies that were less about building massive armies and more about smaller, smartly assembled platoons. Heroes helped separate Warcraft III from its sister series, StarCraft. It wanted to shake RTS players out of their comfort zones. Any good RTS player goes into a match with a plan, but Warcraft III wanted more from you. The trade-off is that they hit much harder when deployed correctly. Warcraft IIIвЂs units are more expensive and more resource-hungry overall, meaning you can only afford to build smaller forces. In those games, units are part of a larger force, a multifaceted war machine built for invading enemy territory and taking ground. There is a greater sense of value per unit than in a game like StarCraft or Command & Conquer. Warcraft, as all RTS games are, was about sound time and economic management.

The RTS genre may have a faint pulse after all. To see Blizzard return to Warcraft III after all these years is heartening.

The introduction of hero units, named characters more powerful than a typical soldier, made it unique within the genre. A natural evolution of the real-time strategy games that birthed the franchise, Warcraft III turned the genre on its ear. Pros who use groups and have a good micro will always outcompete those who donвЂ™t anyway.ДЄs I said before, itвЂ™s a win-win situation.Warcraft III has loomed large in my mind ever since its launch in 2002. It will be easier for newbies to get started with the game, and custom games players will enjoy the improvement when playing with big armies. Low-skill players and custom games players will use unlimited units selection. They will be able to use unlimited units selection as well, if they wish to, but I doubt they will do that often. High-skill players will keep using several groups and they will micro efficiently. Therefore, it will be hard to nuke a unit or a hero with a massive amount of units, whether unlimited units selection is available or not. You will rarely control more than 20-30 combat units in a melee game. In melee games, itвЂ™s capped to 100, and most games donвЂ™t even reach that limit. However, this has nothing to do with Starcraft, because the unit limit is way lower in Warcraft. You can already do that in the current game, if you quickly pick all combat units then order them to attack a unit. in sc2 there arent so valuable units like in wc3 heroes are. That will cause excactly the effect what i told you and it is to order massive amount of units to target one single unit, like a hero that would die massively and instantly.

In starcraft you can pick вЂњunlimited amount of unitsвЂќ. If anything, having a higher selection cap would ease new-users into the game (something that Reforged is clearly aiming to do, as the graphics overhaul wasnвЂ™t really set in motion to give back to the older fan base). So any argument that this would effect pro-level game is pretty silly as well. After recently watching quite a few pro-player replays, IвЂ™ve noticed that nearly all of their unit groups are 8 or less, not even talking about when they box-select for micro. Thirdly, the argument that having the selection cap pushes you to become better is pretty bogus. Even with modular UIвЂ™s, if the hard-coded 12 unit selection cap remains, that will be a hard hurdle to overcome for unit-intensive army games. Secondly, the unit selection cap hard-limits custom map makers in their flexibility. Generally those army compositions (unless itвЂ™s something cheesy like 100 food Gyro) will be made of less than 12 of any one unit, making a unit-by-unit selection cap meaningless. Firstly, most melee match games rarely have you control more than 36 units. I think most of the pro-selection-cap argument is pretty flat for a couple of reasons.

Warcraft 3 unit icons