The problem is that in some countries (I dont know how it is in America so I wont comment on that) the poor are in such a bad state that they cannot possibly hope to do well as they have to spend most of their time just trying to stay alive, cannot afford better education, poorer medical conditions, etc. These people dont do well not because they are lazy but because they dont have the chance.

It can be argued that redistribution of wealth can help even out the playing field to some extent. This is not to make everyone equal but to give everyone equality of opportunity. The chance for everyone to rise in society. If they didnt then it could be said they did not work hard enough. This would require heavy taxation of those who are richer (probably more than most people pay now). This is what many socialists want.

the problem here is that if people are penalised so much for their hard work then many people may not see the point in working hard and society risks stagnation. Also it can be argued that it infringes on their rights to take that much from them and can be seen as a mild form of slavery (if you want to push it that far) as the state can demand so much extra work from people for no benifit to themselves.

Of course there is a lot more to it than Im saying but I dont think many people would be willing to read it (and I aint typing any more either) so the question is are you willing to risk some of the problems I've mentioned (among others) to give everyone an equal chance to everyone's life chances.

For me no rts has ever got close to starcraft. Even now its fun and well balanced and is a game I can keep playing.

I would also say Dawn of War and Company of heroes are very good games and worth a look (best rts games I've played since Starcraft but not quite as good :) ).

Havent played c&c3 or Supreme Commander much yet so cant say much about them

It wasnt as good as the first one but I would say that it was mainly due to how buggy it was (and the beginning at the peragus mining facility is very boring after the first time).

Having said that though it is a good game in its own right, a different story to the first one which was a good thing as I didnt want the same type of story again. It was darker to some extent which I enjoyed, and I like the idea of the influence system (though it could of been implemented a bit better).

The main point though is that if you like the first one and can look past the bugs, you should enjoy it.

Starcraft wins easily. I mean WC3 was alright but I really didnt like the whole hero system. Most fights i remember were just down to who was better with heros and it just felt like it took away from the strategy and overall gameplay.

Having said that though the heros in WC3 were good for custom games but I didnt like them in the normal game