StarCraft II Official! (Pictures)

[IskatuMesk]

Battlecruisers are considerably weaker now then what they were in SC1.

It does look like their damage is still around ~20ish, but it takes so many shots for them to kill warp rays, phoenixes, and other small units during the demo. That makes me believe that SC2 is going to have a more dominant weapon/armor-ish system, which worries me much more then simply carriers not attacking air. They could really screw up the sc gameplay if they introduce a armor system like what ruined CNC and WC3.

[Lavarinth]

Gameplay demo- DEMO.. DEMO. ... Hah.

[IskatuMesk]

*shrug*, they said they were very far along the development of multiplayer, so don't think it'll change that much. They aren't going to add in a unit and leave it there for 3 years and be like, "oh, this unit is completely useless right now, let's wait until we're in the final months to fix it".

[Lavarinth]

Well, I'd personally say that the balancing in multiplayer will not occur until public testing it done.

[IskatuMesk]

I recall them saying there will be no public testing. They'd be doing an invite-only closed beta test.

Which kind of sucks because there's already a bunch of bugs I just know will make it into release, the same way they did with wc3.

[Xenon]

Didn't that article claim Blizzard didn't even know what abilities that Archon would have yet? I wouldn't be surprised if Blizz hadn't decided for sure if the Tempest can attack air. Just because the game is "playable" doesn't necessarily mean the balance is worked out; until the gameplay can actually be tested and seen in action, attempts at balance are just theorycraft.

They might even be experimenting with a totally new gameplay style for the Zerg (as in something novel like the corpses-and-mana-only Undead system that didn't pan out in WC3), and haven't released information about Zerg because it hasn't been finalized and/or they don't want to disappoint people if they can't balance such a novel system.

[Anonymous]

A lot seemed incomplete in the demo, then the PC gamer video for august was leaked and now we see a hell of a lot more was done than we first anticipated.

I wouldn't be surprised if they do change a bunch of things, but I also doubt the purposes of some units are going to change dramatically, either. Why would they promote the carrier's ground-only combat abilities if they're just going to change them again...? (Although that's probably why we do see so little of the zerg; they are probably the most incomplete of the lot.)

It's kind of like the Obsidian Statue in TFT. It was always meant to be a support unit, but the nature of which its support abilities worked changed dramatically over the closed beta. That's like the carrier; it might change, but I bet the general gist of the unit is still going to remain the same.

And I really have nothing better to do for the next year or so then theorycraft, so shoot away.

[Xenon]

By theorycraft I meant Blizzard's attempts at balance; I mean they need to have a working multiplayer mode before they can balance it.

[WB]

Over-excitement seems to have reached it's peak, which is a good thing. Hopefully they won't delay SC2, whether they like it or not, release date is April 1, 2008. Get it done blizzard.

[Grandma]

isn't protoss supposedly the most technologically advanced race of the three? So...wouldn't they have a more powerful air fleet then any other race?


I always assumed that protoss would have the superior and massive fleets.

[UntamedLoli]

Considering they can glass an entire planet and all....

[Maglok]

Well I wouldn't call it massive. Remember protoss units also cost the most supply. A terran marine was 1, 2 lings together was 1 but a zealot was 2 from the get go wasn't it? Or has it been to long for me?

[Grandma]

Well I wouldn't call it massive. Remember protoss units also cost the most supply. A terran marine was 1, 2 lings together was 1 but a zealot was 2 from the get go wasn't it? Or has it been to long for me?

No, you're right. But I'm talking about the size of the ships themselves. Ever since I saw my first carrier, I always figured that carriers would be the average size of a protoss ship, while the Arbiter would be considered small. (I always wished the arbiters were bigger). So a carrier and arbiter combined sized ship would be the large ships.

The temptest shoulda been a goddamn behemoth that raped ground, and they shoulda kept the original carriers. 'course, that is my humble opinion.

[Maglok]

The carriers were never considered middle sized protoss class ships. Remember Tassadar's FLAGSHIP was a carrier, this implies that carriers were the biggest they had of which they have more then 1.

[Grandma]

The carriers were never considered middle sized protoss class ships. Remember Tassadar's FLAGSHIP was a carrier, this implies that carriers were the biggest they had of which they have more then 1.

Oh no, I know that. I'm just saying that's what I think they should've done. I know that carriers are the largest (before the mothership was introduced) ships of the Protoss. And that's where the problem starts. I want more ships that are either as big as, or bigger than the carriers, because I think that'd suite the protoss more.