So they want to try to stop the queen rush? This is the blizzard that I hate. They tried to do this in Wow too. Its stupid. They want to micromanage balance through modifying the races. Why can't they just keep units static and let the mapmakers worry about balance? As I suspected, too much of their WoW philosophy has crept into SC2.

Flames

United States105 Posts

April 23 2010 22:32 GMT

#291

I'm going to LOVE the campaign.

calgar

United States1277 Posts

April 23 2010 22:33 GMT

#292

Wow the campaign looks high quality! Not that I expected anything else, but it looks like it will be an amazing experience in and of itself. I really love that they have extra units that won't be in multiplayer. It adds to the fluff/coolness factor without giving the balance headache. But split servers has me worried. Especially since the metagame has already evolved to be completely different. Korea OP with Z and everyone else needs a buff? It makes more sense to mix the two I think than have islands of games. Regardless, whatever they decide to do I am sure will be good - I've got faith in blizz

unkkz

Norway2196 Posts

April 23 2010 22:35 GMT

#293

I'm so jealous! Thx, was a nice read

bmw

United States14 Posts

April 23 2010 23:32 GMT

#294

Campaign looks good

Pengu1n

United States552 Posts

April 23 2010 23:50 GMT

#295

hmm for the reveal thing what about those games that come down to only 1 probe left for each player and u gutta hide a pylon on the map ;p

MindRush

Romania916 Posts

April 24 2010 00:06 GMT

#296

Here are some helpful links for people desperate as I am for more info about WoL campaign

Gamespot link
IGN link

have fun guys !

Count9

China10928 Posts

April 24 2010 00:11 GMT

#297

Continent specific servers are here to stay =(

Azarkon

United States21060 Posts

April 24 2010 00:23 GMT

#298

Why can't Blizzard just imitate what ICCUP did?

*sigh*

Oh well, at least SP looks good.

mucker

United States1120 Posts

April 24 2010 00:25 GMT

#299

High ground mechanic: They like how it is now. According to Dustin Browder, it gives a clear advantage at first and then it eventually disappears.

This really blows my mind.

How can an experienced RTS game designer think it is a good idea for strategic positioning to mean less as the game goes on? Why not just have the terrain slowly erode during the course of the game so you end up with a completely flat map at the end? And then you could have gravity slowly decrease so there is no difference between ground and air units. How about the range of units just keeps increasing as the game goes on so eventually they no longer need to move to hit each other?

If someone told me they were in to Starcraft and didn't think high ground should give an advantage in the later stages of the game I would honestly assume they'd never played anything but fastest maps.

I hope somebody gets to talk to them seriously about this soon and get some more detail on what they're thinking.

teekesselchen

Germany886 Posts

April 24 2010 00:33 GMT

#300

High ground mechanic: They like how it is now. According to Dustin Browder, it gives a clear advantage at first and then it eventually disappears.

I think that's so ignorant and will ruin the game on the long run. Actually it was the one part where I really had alot of hope when I start reading the article (great job from TL's side btw!)

http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=121216

On April 24 2010 09:25 mucker wrote:

Show nested quote +

Total Agreement. Please, get somebody scan Blizzard guys' heads for tumors or fungal growth somewhere around the era of logic and common sense.