The Earth shakes(Starcraft 2 Announced)

Spyder · Post by **Spyder** » 2007-05-20 12:16am

Stark wrote:That doesn't mean shit for Starcraft 2 *itself*, though. The idea that making a game modable makes up for it fucking sucking because mods can fix it is very annoying. Sure, you can probably turn SC2 into a good game. Or - holy shit - you could just get a better game to start with?

You can't please everyone. I for one loved Starcraft, I'm looking forward to SC2.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2007-05-20 12:19am

Spyder wrote:You can't please everyone. I for one loved Starcraft, I'm looking forward to SC2.

Well I'm not concerned with your taste, just the idea that 'moddability=doesn't matter about the game's actual content'. Being moddable isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card for lazy or uninspired developers. If SC2 is uninspired rubbish, you can't counter that by saying 'oh you can mod inspiration in'.

Like I've said, SC2 would have to be utterly appalling to fail.

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2007-05-20 12:50am

I loved Starcraft...... until I played Total Annihilation. Dawn of War and Company of Heroes further perpetuated Starcraft's decline on my fun ladder.

Indeed Starcraft is a massively successful game and the sequel will be the same. And Starcraft is a great game..... as long as that was the only RTS you ever really played. Once I started seriously playing other games, my eyes were opened.

Spyder · Post by **Spyder** » 2007-05-20 12:53am

Stark wrote:
Spyder wrote:You can't please everyone. I for one loved Starcraft, I'm looking forward to SC2.
Well I'm not concerned with your taste, just the idea that 'moddability=doesn't matter about the game's actual content'.

Who said that?

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2007-05-20 12:57am

I'm just being grumpy about the whole thing, sorry.

SAMAS · Post by **SAMAS** » 2007-05-20 01:56am

At the very least, I'm probably going to play through it once or twice for the story. I really wanna know if Kerrigan and Raynor get to finally have it out.

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2007-05-20 02:49am

A series of small previews from Gamespot.

1.

The panel answered questions on numerous topics, including Starcraft II's development history, which Pardo expained "started shortly after Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne" back in 2003. According to Pardo, the game is "very far along," and that the game is already playable in multiplayer with all three factions. When asked about the release date, Pardo gave the answer you may have come to expect from Blizzard: "The game will be released when it's ready."

According to the panel, the game is being developed by a team of approximately 40, though on the matter of the budget and the schedule, Morhaime simply said, "We don't really have a budget; we'll spend as much time and resources as we need to make this game great."

When asked about how Blizzard was approaching the challenge of making a game that would appeal both to hardcore and to casual players, the panel replied that the game will appeal to hardcore fans by being geared toward "highly competitive, skill-based gameplay," as well as by efforts to "continue to drive new features onto Battle.net," Blizzard's in-house online game service. Also, Blizzard is trying to encourage players to watch match replays to get into the "drama" and emotion behind competition, similar to the way that close-in cameras helped popularize tournament poker.

To address concerns from hardcore fans, Blizzard commented on questions specific to gameplay and the competitive community, such as the play speed of the demonstration videos, which didn't run as quickly as the original Starcraft. This is because, according to Pardo, the game played during the demonstration was set on a slower speed; Pardo suggested that Starcraft II will have multiple speed settings, similar to Warcraft III.

The panel also confirmed that the sequel will have only the three factions of the Protoss, Terrans, and Zerg; there will be no fourth faction. To address another question, the panel suggested that the resource management system in the sequel will feature "some enhancements, but it will still be very similar to the resource management in Starcraft, and just as important."

When asked about system requirements, the panel replied that the requirements haven't been fully finalized, but that the game will support Pixel Shader 2.0 graphics and PCs with either Windows XP or Vista. Given that the trailers shown at this morning's presentation featured cameo appearances from key Starcraft characters like Zeratul, Jim Raynor, and Kerrigan, creative development VP Chris Metzen confirmed that those three characters will definitely appear in the game. He added the sequel will definitely expand on the story from Starcraft and Brood War, but that the studio would otherwise have to stay "tight-lipped" on further details.

The panel also fielded broader questions pertaining to the sequel's future and Blizzard's future. When asked why Blizzard decided to develop Starcraft II rather than, for instance, another Diablo sequel or another massively multiplayer game, Morhaime replied that Starcraft II was a project that much of the company had wanted to work on for years, and that the current level of technology made the game seem like the right choice. Morhaime also pointed out that the new development proved that Blizzard "wasn't just a massively multiplayer company" that would rest on the laurels of the highly successful World of Warcraft.

The panel also fielded a thorny question on the creation of new intellectual property (IP). Blizzard has become known for focusing on creating games only from a select few IPs it owns (Starcraft, Warcraft, and Diablo), and that although several team members "would like to explore the creation of new IPs, [they] are still very much in love with the three," and that Blizzard's approach to developing games--that is, developing very few games at a time--meant that the company often finds itself focusing only on these properties.

Morhaime also fielded a question on Blizzard's commitment to the PC as its primary game platform. He cited the "indefinite hold" status of the studio's console game Starcraft: Ghost as an impetus that eventually drove the company to focus on the PC as its primary platform. Morhaime said that decision "paid off in spades," given that Blizzard's new focus now lets it work on Starcraft II and World of Warcraft expansions.

The executive also suggested that Microsoft's new initiative to bring the Xbox Live experience to the PC in the form of Live Anywhere wouldn't change Blizzard's online strategy. The company remains committed to supporting and developing its Battle.net Web site for online play.

2.

SEOUL--At the 2007 Worldwide Invitational event, Blizzard Entertainment is offering tournament play for its hardcore fans and open panel discussions for its inquisitive ones. The company's senior artists, including senior 3D artist Dave Berggren, senior 3D artist Allen Dilling, senior 3D artist Trevor Jacobs, lead technical artist Rob McNaughton, and senior art director Samwise Didier, sit on a panel to discuss how the studio creates art "the Blizzard way."

Didier explains that within the core philosophies of Blizzard art design, "nothing is subtle--every character is over-the-top; every environment is either beautiful or battle-scarred." Says, the art director, Blizzard's characters come to life by means of strong silhouettes, exaggerated proportions, distinctive animations, and "bold, saturated colors" so that they not only look memorable, but are easy to distinguish at a glance--an important quality for real-time strategy units that must often be viewed from a zoomed-out view. Didier adds that at Blizzard, art is something that "isn't finished until the game is shipped"--artists typically work on continued passes right until games are complete.

Technical artist McNaughton then takes the stage and explains how the studio uses a handful of primary art tools to create its games; Adobe Photoshop for texture art, 3D Studio Max for its low-polygon models, Mudbox for its high-polygon models, and its own proprietary toolsets, such as "Startools," to create in-game objects such as trees and other "doodads," and "Scumedit," the updated map editor. McNaughton also points out that Startools and Scumedit will be part of the map- and mod-making tools that will ship wth the game. McNaughton explains that Starcraft II's graphics will be based off of the DirectX 9.0 API will full support for Pixel Shader 2.0, including support for conventional DirectX 9.0 effets such as normal mapping and high dynamic range lighting and bloom. However, the artist tempers his description of the advanced graphical effects by explaining that although the game will feature advanced graphical effects, it will scale, to some extent, downward to still allow players who don't own cutting-edge PC hardware to play the game.

3D artist Trevor Jacobs then discusses the process of how Blizzard starts with 2D concept art and eventualy arrives at finished models, using the Protoss "immortal" tank as an example to go from hand drawing to rough model (adjusted to make sure the model looks good from the traditional RTS overhead view) to texturing to polish, and 3D artist Allen Dilling reiterates the importance of creating distinctive animations for units. As an example, Dilling shows the Starcraft II flying mutalisk and tiny, doglike zerglings in action, both alone and in large crowds. Starcraft II's units will have multiple "move cycle" animations so they don't all move in unison with the exact same frames of animation; the crowd of zerglings looks especially creepy because none of them seems to be running about in the same way or in the same direction, like a swarm of hyperactive fire ants. Dilling explains that because Starcraft II is being developed with professional competition in mind, the sequel's special effects will be "tight, fast, and quick" such that they don't obscure the action or slow down your computer. However, "landmark events" like the summoning of the top-level protoss mothership unit will be accompanied by sufficient graphical fanfare to point out their importance.

The panel winds down with a brief presentaton on environments from 3D artist Dave Berggren, who suggests that Starcraft II will take place both in new worlds and in worlds that had appeared in the original game. Berggren shows concepts for the protoss world of Belshir, a lush, jungle planet that had once served as a religious retreat for the race before it was sacked by the zerg--the planet has since become covered in ruined temples. Berggren also introduces Braxis Alpha, the terran settlement that appeared in yesterday's video presentation. Braxis Alpha will be a combination of industrial wasteland and mountainous regions, covered in craggy rock formations and factory-like debris, such as loose gears and turbines that jut out from mountain faces. Finally, Berggren shows concept art of the zerg world of Char (where Kerrigan, the former terran ghost unit-turned-zerg-commander holds court), which will, like in the previous games, be a craggy, volcanic planet covered in lava floes. Berggren points out that although Blizzard's art team is taking advantage of modern texturing approaches to environments by mapping terrains and overlaying photorealistic textures, the art team will also make final passes to tweak environmental areas by hand.

3.

Three of Blizzard's top creative talents, creative director Andy Chambers, senior game designer Dustin Browder, and vice president of game design Rob Pardo sit on a panel to discuss gameplay details for the company's newly announced sequel, Starcraft II.

Pardo begins the discussion by revisiting several of the studio's previous games, going back as far as Warcraft II, which the vice president cites as the first Blizzard game to garner a significant following as a competitive multiplayer game. Pardo explains that the original Starcraft arose from the team's desire to create a fast-paced real-time strategy game like Warcraft II, but in a different universe, then describes how Blizzard's subsequent RTS project, 2002's Warcraft III, took a very different approach by offering slower-paced gameplay with smaller armies, hero units, and many units with activatable abilities to appeal to "the average gamer." Pardo suggests that the units in both the original Starcraft, and in the sequel, will instead act as "movers and shooters"--mostly autonomous forces that generally lack special abilties, but will instead be used in large control groups to "do their own thing" in battle, rather than requiring the micromanagement of high-level Warcraft III play.

Pardo continues to contrast Warcraft III against Starcraft II, explaining that Warcraft III had less of an emphasis on economic buildup to allow more focus on battles. The 2002 game also, suggests the VP, was much less about early-game victories. While that game did introduce "creeps"--neutral creatures that could be fought to gain experience points for your hero units, early armies in Warcraft III were generally capable of only harrassing your enemies, not defeating them outright. Pardo suggests that "with Starcraft II, [Blizzard is] really going back to its roots to make a true sequel to Starcraft"--a sequel where resource management will be much more central to gameplay, with less micromanagement of different units with special abilities, and in which full-on early-game "rushing" (making an all-out assault at or near the beginning of a new game session) will be much more viable. In fact, the VP goes on to state that the game will probably offer more early "tech tree" optons--different development paths players can take by building different structures and researching different upgrades--which will make early-game scouting more important, and will make early-game rushing a more-diverse and deeper strategy.

Pardo also suggests that Warcraft III might have been a more-forgiving game for beginners--differences in skill levels seemed less pronounced in that game. Says the VP, in Starcraft II, there will be many more nuances that will separate highly skilled players from beginners, and good players from great ones. So in contrast to the sometimes-protracted matches of Warcraft III, Pardo expects the average Starcraft II multiplayer match to last about 20 minutes of real time; possibly even as little as 15 minutes when played by the pros. Pardo points out that there will be numerous subtleties added to the game that expert players will learn to use to their advantage, such as a revamped "high ground" system. In the previous Starcraft, ground units that had a height advantage by standing on high ground gained attack bonuses, but would also reveal themselves when attacking. In the sequel, units with high ground will still gain the attack bonuses but will remain concealed by the "fog of war" (the black shroud that covers unexplored areas)--a fact that can be used together with other line-of-signt nuances to your advantage.

Pardo ends his part of the talk by emphasizing that Blizzard remains committed to making the three factions distinct, and to making Starcraft II's gameplay true to the original game, but also different and new. For instance, the VP cites the new protoss units and abilities that have been shown--the ability to "warp" into different locations, and the powerful mothership unit. Says the VP, yes, Blizzard could have also looked to create a "terran version" and a "protoss version" of these new units and abilities, but the team did not. It is instead looking to balance the factions against each other while keeping them distinct. Pardo suggests that Starcraft II will, like the original game, still be a game about "hard counters"--such as how certain units can be directly "countered" (defeated decisively) by specific counter-units; as an example, Pardo shows a brief demonstration of protoss templar units, which are the counter-unit to zerglings, annihilating a swarm of the tiny zerg infantry with their "psi storm" ability. Says Pardo: "Yes, [Starcraft II] will stil be fast-paced and have 'multitasking' for resources and combat, but it'll be a very different game."

The floor is then given to game designer Dustin Browder, who uses his time to cite specific examples of different units in play. To begin with, Browder shows a demonstration of the protoss stalker, a ground-based unit that can attack both air and ground enemies and isn't all that tough, but can "blink" (warp in and out) to any location to which they have line of sight. The obvious uses of this handy ability include pursuing fleeing units by constantly "blinking in" in front of them, but they can also apparently be used as powerful base raiders by bypassing terrain barriers if you have an aerial scout, such as the protoss phoenix, to quickly get you line-of-sight beyond terrain obstacles. In addition, extremely skilled players will be able to defeat slower-moving melee enemies with stalkers by sticking and moving, repeatedly blinking in and out of range. The designer shows a demonstration of stalkers up against a group of protoss zealots, somewhat slow melee units that simply aren't able to close in for a hit as the stalkers keep blinking away and firing constantly, eventually winning the battle.

Browder shows how the new units and new abilties for existing units will help diversify gameplay and work within the counter-unit system. For instance, the protoss immortal, a ground-based tank unit, is extremely tough but slow (and can therefore be countered by quick-thinking players with enough resources to build up counter-units, and is also therefore not able to effectively flee from a losing battle), and possesses a powerful energy shield that is triggered only from heavy-duty fire. This makes the immortal a natural counter-unit for the terran siege tank, whose powerful cannons can't do much against the immortal's energy shield. However, the slow-moving immortals themselves can be easily countered by a large swarm of zerglings, which don't deal enough damage to trigger the immortals' shields, and are too quick for the tank to outrun.

Browder then shows an additional example of the kind of subtleties that will separate skilled players from unskilled players. The protoss phoenix, a flying unit, has a special "overload" ability that creates a damaging energy field around itself, then renders it immobile and helpless shortly afterward. Browder shows a simulated battle between a player with six phoenix units and another player with only four. The player with six phoenixes apparently chokes and uses the overload ability too early, allowing the other player to dodge out of harm's way, then arrange the four phoenixes around the now immobile six in a loose formation and overload the six into oblivion, which suggests that sheer numbers won't always prevail in the face of high-level skill in Starcraft II.

Browder then shows a demonstration of protoss warp technology, which can be used to mount a powerful surprise offense by summoning a large army seemingly out of nowhere. However, the same tech can apparently be used for base defense; the designer shows how an early zergling raid on a protoss base goes sour as the tiny zerg suddenly find themselves boxed in between protoss buildings and a small contingent of melee-attacking zealots, with immortal tanks lobbing fire from a distance. The designer closes by stating that the team's goals are to "recapture the magic of the original Starcraft, which was a wonderful, wonderful game," and to "make Starcraft II about these three unique races by generating new tactics and strategies."

The panel then takes various questions which reveal some intriguing new details about the sequel. An audience question about future beta plans prompts Pardo to state that Starcraft II will likely have a "closed beta by invitation, similar to [Blizzard's] other products, though this time, [Blizzard] will also enlist the help of pro players to help test for balance." When asked about the status of the terrans (who were decimated at the end of the Brood War expansion pack for the original Starcraft), creative designer Andy Chambers explains that "the UED terran forces were destroyed by Kerrigan's zerg armies (though a few surviving companies may stil be around somewhere)," and that the Terran faction in Starcraft II will primarily consist of the "evil empire" of the Terran Dominion. When asked about the status of lead character Jim Raynor, Chambers replies that since Starcraft II takes place four years after Brood War, "Raynor has been having some adventures for sure," but declines to comment further. Chambers also suggests that the ancient Xel'Naga, which helped both the protoss and zerg races become what they are (but were later destroyed by the zerg) will also figure into Starcraft II's story "in a rather epic tale." To cap the presentation, Browder fields a final question that may come as a relief to some players: that there are "no plans at this time for naval combat in Starcraft II."

Laughing Mechanicus · Post by **Laughing Mechanicus** » 2007-05-20 02:50am

brianeyci wrote:
Uraniun235 wrote:(But hey, if it's so easy to come up with something new and fresh and exciting and oh my god INNOVATIVE!!!! then why don't you start a thread and throw up some of your revolutionary ideas for us to see?)
Heh heh I would like to see that.

I already did so.

Stark wrote:It'll ignore everything that's changed in RTS design (frankly, people who claim RTSs haven't changed since StarCraft need to play more RTSs)

I mis-phrased myself slightly - what I meant was there haven't been many general improvements that can be applied across the genre as a whole to the very basic things, such as AI and unit controls, which the StarCraft 2 designers can successfully nick. There have definitely been marked improvements when games take the core design in a different direction - such as the Total War series, Homeworld and the 'Rise of...' series. I'm really looking forward to World in Conflict for this reason. I suppose you could argue that that StarCraft's design is at a dead end and right at this moment I can't think why you would be wrong, to be honest.

EDIT- Just read the above post:

Blizzard wrote:In addition, extremely skilled players will be able to defeat slower-moving melee enemies with stalkers by sticking and moving, repeatedly blinking in and out of range. The designer shows a demonstration of stalkers up against a group of protoss zealots, somewhat slow melee units that simply aren't able to close in for a hit as the stalkers keep blinking away and firing constantly, eventually winning the battle.

Good to see Blizzard intends to continue rewarding players with extreme skills who mastered the art of annoyingly abusing an ability.

Covenant · Post by **Covenant** » 2007-05-20 02:54am

I just hope they go the C&C3 route of "All fun, candylike gameplay, lots of flashies."

If they're not going to innovate with the gameplay, not going to offer something pretty with the graphics, and not going to really do much of anything new, in any way, at all... then really that's just a half-assed effort. I really want them to make an effort here, not just print some money with an entirely lackluster product.

I mean, hell. Okay. Starcraft UI and logistics management nowadays is really pretty cruddy, with hard to move units that are pretty unintelligent, and odd implimentation of units (like stand and shoot fighters), and other wierd things like the incredibly tiny control groups. So I can assume they're going to fix the UI elements and let me select as many marines as I want, I assume. I bet they'll also decrease some of the micro in some places, just because they'd need to intentionally build it into the game for it to exist.

So I really hope they take a nod from C&C3 and focus on making it fun, fast, violent and gorgeous. If they use SC1's highly tuned balance as a jumping-off point for SC2 and then add on some high-end graphics, I'd be happy to give it a shot. It may be a rather unambitious project, but eh, it'd be worth a buy I bet. They're adding a 4th species afterall, and are bound to have a good singleplayer experience.

Also, I really expect the graphics to get better. There's no excuse for them to be this bad, and I don't think they'll look this way when it's done. I'm sure they'll also add in some more features and make it exciting. I don't have faith in Blizzard, but I have faith in their desire to make a lot of money. Starcraft did some things that were new for the time, and I bet SC2 will do a few interesting things as well. They may not be amazingly new, but they may be good gameplay changes. I'm willing to give it a run, but I still want to be critical of it in the meantime. ;D

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2007-05-20 02:57am

Aaron Ash wrote: I mis-phrased myself slightly - what I meant was there haven't been many general improvements that can be applied across the genre as a whole to the very basic things, such as AI and unit controls, which the StarCraft 2 designers can successfully nick. There have definitely been marked improvements when games take the core design in a different direction - such as the Total War series, Homeworld and the 'Rise of...' series. I'm really looking forward to World in Conflict for this reason. I suppose you could argue that that StarCraft's design is at a dead end and right at this moment I can't think why you would be wrong, to be honest.

Yeah you're right - within the scope of Starcraft 2 they could certainly incorporate most of the things that have become standard in the interim... I'm just not sure they will. But like I said, perhaps making everything look the same is a GOOD thing: they could certainly make a 'modern' RTS with the same units as Starcraft.

Seggybop · Post by **Seggybop** » 2007-05-20 03:34am

Ace Pace wrote:snipsnip

It looks like their overall plan is simply to pander to the Korean audience.
How wonderful for us.

Medic · Post by **Medic** » 2007-05-20 03:37am

Stark wrote:Yeah you're right - within the scope of Starcraft 2 they could certainly incorporate most of the things that have become standard in the interim... I'm just not sure they will. But like I said, perhaps making everything look the same is a GOOD thing: they could certainly make a 'modern' RTS with the same units as Starcraft.

It guarantees their Korean Starcraft base.

Other than that, it's annoying. I'll probably still get the game, but that's with an 'eventually' attached onto it. still got the AC6 tunnel-vision, like, seriously... it's bad :\

Vendetta · Post by **Vendetta** » 2007-05-20 04:50am

SPC Brungardt wrote:still got the AC6 tunnel-vision, like, seriously... it's bad :\

Yeah, I know how that feels...

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2007-05-20 05:24pm

Seggybop wrote:
Ace Pace wrote:snipsnip
It looks like their overall plan is simply to pander to the Korean audience.
How wonderful for us.

From their perspective, it makes complete sense. The other audiences will buy it and play it one way or the other, but if they change things too much they risk alienating the Korean audience which may elect to stick with SC1 for their professional gameplay.

Aaron Ash wrote:Good to see Blizzard intends to continue rewarding players with extreme skills who mastered the art of annoyingly abusing an ability.

Uhh, how is it an abuse if Blizzard intends it to be used in that fashion?

Covenant · Post by **Covenant** » 2007-05-20 05:29pm

Uraniun235 wrote:
Aaron Ash wrote:Good to see Blizzard intends to continue rewarding players with extreme skills who mastered the art of annoyingly abusing an ability.
Uhh, how is it an abuse if Blizzard intends it to be used in that fashion?

I don't see this as abuse either. I actually thought it was kinda an interesting idea. By building in some incredibly difficult units, it's similar to things like the Raging Demon or Final Atomic Crusher in Street Fighter--they're really hard to use moves that are targetted towards the high skill players. I like it.

Sure, it may seem abusive, but that's a lot of micro too. What blizz is doing is giving you the option to use some of these high-technique units in your lineup even if they require a lot more hand-holding, and giving them some potent advantages that make it worthwhile. It's way less abusive and exploitive than if they hadn't thought of this already. They're going to balance the unit with cheesy blink-kiting in mind. That's way better than the C&C3 Scorpion or Venom spam breaking the game when it completely wasn't intended to.

It rewards the 'APM' crowd in the sense that it's adding micro to the game, but managing your units should provide some benefit. I'd love if they had units like this but NOT heroes and commands and such. Give me a few 'high twitch' units that I can use or ignore, but not micro-demanding units I can't live without.

Edward Yee · Post by **Edward Yee** » 2007-05-20 05:49pm

Incidentally, looked at the Phase Prism unit at the official site's Protoss profile...

Both living and inorganic subjects can be transformed into energy, and their unique energy signature imprinted into the prism's crystal lattice core. Upon reaching the destination point the operation is reversed and the stored energy signatures are reconfigured into matter in proximity to the phase prism.

Is it me, or does this sound rather similar (to a layman's eye) to what the supposed workings of a Star Trek replicator would be? Problem with Star Trek's implementations aside, I wonder why the Protoss would go to such a method instead of the Shuttles they'd deployed four years ago (in-universe).

Covenant · Post by **Covenant** » 2007-05-20 06:24pm

Edward Yee wrote:Incidentally, looked at the Phase Prism unit at the official site's Protoss profile...
Both living and inorganic subjects can be transformed into energy, and their unique energy signature imprinted into the prism's crystal lattice core. Upon reaching the destination point the operation is reversed and the stored energy signatures are reconfigured into matter in proximity to the phase prism.
Is it me, or does this sound rather similar (to a layman's eye) to what the supposed workings of a Star Trek replicator would be? Problem with Star Trek's implementations aside, I wonder why the Protoss would go to such a method instead of the Shuttles they'd deployed four years ago (in-universe).

Shuttles AND the arbiter teleport. I'm not sure myself. Perhaps they just wanted to further emphasize the Protoss' uniqueness. As for an in-game description, I have no idea, the'll have some BS thing about it being more efficent to carry the 'energy sig' of a batallion of tanks than the actual tanks.

Andrew_Fireborn · Post by **Andrew_Fireborn** » 2007-05-20 06:41pm

It also acts as a forward base/mobile pylon, and the upgraded Protoss Barracks seems to have the ability to summon units at any point within a "pylon's" radius.

Could provide some interesting tactics.

Edward Yee · Post by **Edward Yee** » 2007-05-20 06:46pm

Covenant wrote:Shuttles AND the arbiter teleport. I'm not sure myself. Perhaps they just wanted to further emphasize the Protoss' uniqueness. As for an in-game description, I have no idea, the'll have some BS thing about it being more efficent to carry the 'energy sig' of a batallion of tanks than the actual tanks.

Didn't see anything about Shuttles doing so, or the Arbiter using Trek-style like the Phase Prism now does, at Battle.net. Liking its role though as both troop transport and mobile power. Screw "additional Pylons"!

Andrew_Fireborn, the first thing I thought when I saw the Warp Gate upgrade (of the "barracks" Gateway) was: "Airmobile? Is it just me, or is this something like FCS?" As I read it, phase prisms count as pylons for the purposes of this -- thus making the Protoss the only race so far with mobile spawn points, and twisting the old Zealot/Reaver drop about.

Andrew_Fireborn · Post by **Andrew_Fireborn** » 2007-05-20 06:51pm

Yeah, they're definately making the Protoss more mobile. Makes me curious as to what they plan to add to the other races.

(And I cut my RTS teeth on C&C: RA, Barracks & Factories are etched into my mind as prime build structures.

)

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2007-05-20 07:45pm

Ah, looks like more twitch-gameplay.

Go back to FPS', twitch-monkies. Sheesh.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2007-05-20 07:54pm

Covenant wrote:I don't see this as abuse either. I actually thought it was kinda an interesting idea. By building in some incredibly difficult units, it's similar to things like the Raging Demon or Final Atomic Crusher in Street Fighter--they're really hard to use moves that are targetted towards the high skill players. I like it.

Sure, it may seem abusive, but that's a lot of micro too. What blizz is doing is giving you the option to use some of these high-technique units in your lineup even if they require a lot more hand-holding, and giving them some potent advantages that make it worthwhile. It's way less abusive and exploitive than if they hadn't thought of this already. They're going to balance the unit with cheesy blink-kiting in mind. That's way better than the C&C3 Scorpion or Venom spam breaking the game when it completely wasn't intended to.

It rewards the 'APM' crowd in the sense that it's adding micro to the game, but managing your units should provide some benefit. I'd love if they had units like this but NOT heroes and commands and such. Give me a few 'high twitch' units that I can use or ignore, but not micro-demanding units I can't live without.

You don't see that doing this means if you CAN'T manage the utterly retarded constant-micro units you will UTTERLY SUCK and never, ever win? That *isn't* a good thing. It means, for instance, that people like me will never play it online. Not that they care, since they have a whole country that loves this shit.

Andrew_Fireborn · Post by **Andrew_Fireborn** » 2007-05-20 08:12pm

Here's the real question: How many Koreans do you think will starve/dehydrate to death shortly after the game is released?

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2007-05-20 09:13pm

All of them?

Tanasinn · Post by **Tanasinn** » 2007-05-20 10:54pm

The only great disappointment I have at this early stage is the scaling: they haven't even TRIED to improve unit scale!

Things may change with time, but the fact that they weren't even willing to make a few ship models bigger for these early showings speaks ill of any hopes for proper scaling, I think.