See, HW required a lot less orthadox "build and rush" thinking. You could play many different ways, so the whole game didn't just devolve into people building as many units of a certain type that they could.
Yep, that's why I liked it. I prefer siege tactics. I start off keeping well out of the way, spreading gently but not challenging any players. I build up my defences until I control sufficient space and resources. Then I build up an attack fleet.
Then I strike at the enemy's resource fields, just enough to slow them down. When they counterattack, my strike force retreats and lures the enemy into my defensive fleet (which reduces the enemy to wreckage). Then I repeat. Eventually, the enemy runs out of equipment with which to defend the resource field, and I mop up any remaining units there.
Repeat with other resource fields.
Eventually, they're left with a small cache of resources and a fortified base. I sit outside, pick off defences, repair my units, and slowly whittle away their mobile weapon systems. Once all defences are down, I crush them.
This works with most games. StarCraft with modded maps (50000 minerals to a crystal patch) is an example of one game where this
doesn't work. Warzone 2100 is a shining example of a game where this ALWAYS works, unless you get picked on at the beginning or the enemy is doing the same thing.
I don't like taking casualties, even if I have over a million more units to throw at the enemy. Except when playing StarCraft. There's something fun about sending 150 Hydralisk to swarm over an enemy base, even if they all get smeared. You just do it again...
And I intended this to be a short post, but I tend to rattle on about games for unreasonably long periods of time.