Don't you guys think that StarCraft 2 is more about Macro than Micro? I've been playing RTS since Dune 2 and I'm not a good player but being good is irrelevant here since I'm not talking about competing rather than talking about the difference between StarCraft 2 and my previous RTS games. What I realized in my Starcraft 2 games is I ended up spending most of my time Macroing (building structures, producing units, expanding) than Microing. Microing in StarCrat 2 is not as essential as it is in WarCraft 3. I never felt overwhelmed with producing units before and I just feel weird seeing I have thausands of minerals that I didn't use. Then I realized that I'm not in WarCraft 3 anymore and I should spend more time using the resources than I used to and unlike WarCraft 3, StarCraft 2 battles are of a bigger scale and fewer units have special abilities as opposed to WC3. I think I like this approach because it make StarCraft 2 a unique experience in that sense.
StarCraft and StarCraft 2 have always been about 50/50 micro and macro. That's in importance, not actual time. I'd say you should be spending 75% of your time in game macroing, etc. and 25% of it controlling your units. However, the entire game can hinge on the correct movement of units and placement. But you're never going to find one spell or one unit being pulled out that ends the game. It's a slow buildup of effort.
StarCraft 2 is indeed challenging and intense in a good way. I think StarCraft 2 will have a nice experience curve for casual and pro players. Opportunity of improvement are huge compared to other RTS games and I'm not sure if this is an intelligent design from Blizzard side or just mere conisidence. The more you're going to play StarCraft 2 the better you will be. This is true for all RTS, I know, but for StarCraft 2 this "experience" curve is much much bigger. Thanks Joneagle for your tips
