Friends who often pay attention to the standalone version of the game may have seen my humble work two months ago in the release special of "Command & Conquer 3": RTS Art View. In it, I discussed several types of "show" or "schools" in current RTS games. I particularly classified Warcraft III as an "artwork", considering it a "micro-game" that is based on skill (Technology)-oriented strategies and relies on tactical details. Now Blizzard has announced StarCraft II. Although the release date is still unknown, it is undoubtedly a major event in the RTS industry, with some players even claiming it will spark another "nationwide RTS craze." I agree with and am happy to see all this, but I cannot join the large number of fans in enthusiastically declaring that "all other RTS games must make way for StarCraft II"... Do you know why it took Blizzard ten years to release a sequel to StarCraft? It's because Blizzard was observing, learning, or rather, drawing lessons...