Campaign Creations

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.

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

*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".

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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?

Maglok wrote: 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.

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.

Maglok wrote: 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.