What kinds of Strategy and Tactics do we actually want?

That.

On the other hand, I do like the stream economy.

Me too. Managing a streaming economy can be simple or hard depending on the implementation.

That wasn't what made SupCom's eco derp. It was the 4 levels of MEX development.

careful here, about which starcraft are you talking?
one answer will make you look stupid, the other will make you look less stupid

Many games that call themselves 'Strategy' games, are not that at all. Nothing but 'micro', or 'eco'.

A game i liked to play called RUSE, in it you could deceive your enemys, cloak your units, radio silence, fake units. Deception was the name of the game, and of course all warfare is based on deception (so said Sun Tzu). You could sneak your units behind your enemy, hide them in forests and ambush the enemy. Strategy is easier to exist when scale, and deception exists. IF you have played RUSE, you would understand how important deception is, not to mention fun!

One thing i don't want to see in this game is 'eco' management. If i beat someone because i out 'eco'd them, then this game would have failed to me. Obviously economy is important, but i want someone to still be able to fight back using strategy even if they are economically at a disadvantage.

Scale! that is something i want to see also, sure use your tactics and 'micro' to out manouver the enemy, but if your enemy is building a base on the other side of the galaxy, and just delaying you...

Things like that. If i win a game without thinking, then to be it's a poor game. I've played some of my best games in some 'strategy' games, just by having awesome micro, and being really quick and anal with my economy. No thinking involved, and i hated it.

God i hated that so much. I ended up playing 20 minute build times just so i could play the game, even then it was annoying as i just traded one problem for another, namely shields and being able to turtle up.

There was a national geographic documentary about professional starcraft during WCG a while back. They put some electrodes on starcraft players and scanned what parts of their brain lighted up. The parts of the brain associated with contemplation did not light up while the parts associated with reflex and reaction did. The conclusion was that for professionals starcraft is not contemplative but rather reflexive and reactive.

found it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kc0Pgm8lWRw

You think before the game, deciding builds and such, during the game you gotta react to the enemy.

this doesn't prove, that there isn't strategy, those player well already good at the game, they know everything, so they know all the strategies and they don't need to make new one(the meta game even in 2005 was practically established, and get perfected in the next years).
Broodwar is very different from sc2(even if at first glance they seem the same, they are not), as more strategy value, trust me

there were things like hold a base forever while expanding, or contain your opponent while expanding ecc..., tons of positional play, tons of way of predicting your opponent and make the right decision, just watch any tvp
this is strategy.

if u say so

Depends how you define strategy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategy

I subscribe to the notion that strategy is about adapting to your opponent in which case games like chess, TA and starcraft have strategy - the latter two are just more shallow.

no they aren't more shallow, you just adapt to your opponent all the time(in TA less maybe), plz just watch a TVP in StarCraft Broodwar

just give me lots of options ...

a.o. rush, harrasment, powerplay, assasination/snipes, bombardment, siege, nuking, TOTAL ANNIHILATION :twisted: ... ahem ...
actualy this is what i do expect from this game anyway ... and i´m positiv they will deliver