On May 21, there was a SC2 testing event in S. Korea for select few invitees.
From an user post at Fomos:
Key points - good game speed, good graphics, and Terran is still awesome.
Graphics was solid. Units and buildings are more conspicuous than they were in the latest Battle Report. Game speed is really fast. Units speed is comparable to SC1, but once a battle starts, it ends quickly. This is partially due to Zealots and Stalkers having low life points and Banelings.
One gas is comparable to 0.75 gas in SC1, in terms of macro resource management. Two gasses are comparable to 1.5 gases in SC1. In a main base play, one gas is not sufficient for upgrades and/or gas units.
Automatic resources gathering is convenient, and that extra room for control all goes to unit control.
Following is the new scoop on each race and my experience with some strategies:
Terran - Main base play is really good! It's incomparable to SC1. In SC1, 7 Marines/1 Medic/1 Dropship play is good, but in SC2, 16 Marines/2 Medivac is even better. Without Banelings or Roaches, Zerg is dead to this strategy. Going straight to Lair is dead too. This is due to the presence of Reactor. - Hot keys: Scan = w, Reactor = o, Tech Lab = a - Marine's gunfire comes and goes so smoothly that, in terms of appearances, it's hard to distinguish between normal attack and Stim attack. - Viking has ridiculously long air-to-air shooting range.
Zerg - Banelings are essential! Lair tech is futile. Locating Zerglins in an arch shape on the top of a ramp is useless. - Mutals are really fast! - Broodlings - they have 20 life points, but they look bigger and stronger than Zerglings. My units were suddenly dead when they were attacking buildings at a close range. - New attack style of Spine Crawlers - instead hitting directly from the ground, something comes up and attacks like a lance. Looks ugly! - Not much change on Queens and Infested Terran - Long shooting range of Hydralisks - while attacking with Stalkers and Colossus, Colossus behind Stalkers were easily shot by Hydralisks. - Queens cost 150 minerals each, so they don't affect tech tree much. - Spawning Pool looks good!
Protoss - Phoenix is really fast. Faster than Scourages or upgraded Scouts in SC1. It kills Overlords about 1.5 times faster than Corsair. Overlords will be all dead if Zerg doesn't prepare air-attacking units soon. Moving shot seems difficult; it halts briefly before attacking. Overall, Phoenix is awesome. - 3 Gates strategy - doesn't work because of Banelings. Zealots are all dead on the way. But I killed Overlords with Phoenix and won the match. - Carrier - Interceptors don't move as good as in SC1. Instead of swinging by the opponents and attacking, it feels that they are rotating in a circle. Attacking motion should be faster. - Probe - it has to kinds of beams! When gathering, the beam is kinda purple haze; when attacking, it's about the same in SC1. - Colossus - it's strong but has short shooting range. It's not easy to use. Warp Prism is not necessary. It's hard to micro this with other units. I pressed "attack" with Colossus and some other units, and Colossus climbed up ahead of other units and was killing Dronge by himself. I got lucky this time, but at other times Colossue would have been dead by himself. It kills Hydralisks well, and Hydralisks kill it well, too.
Overall, it's bad for Zerg. In SC1, even if Terran or Protoss does a main base play, Zerg could have gone by with Sunken Colonies defense. That's impossible in SC2. Zerg can go Lair only if Terran or Protoss takes the first expansion. It's really painful to defend 16 Marines/2 Medivacs.
I told my opponents I would go for macro-later-game styles. But I experimented some strategies and played speedy games. I apologize!
FROM ANOTEHR USER!!! 1. Game Speed - Overall, speed was good. It’s comparable to SC1. 2. Unit a. Terran - Marauder is really good compared to its price and place on tech tree. 120 hit points! For Protoss, it’s hopeless without Zealots with speed upgrade. For Zerg, it’s…fucked! b. Zerg - Game play will different depending on the use of Queen. - Up to 5 eggs per Hatchery. So it’s easy to get like 30 Zerglings in a short time. - Units are kinda weak! - Against Terran, Zerg will be difficult. Zerg has good quantity, but Marauders can go into Bunkers! c. Protoss - Zealots are stronger than expected. 6 Zerglings have a hard time beating 2 Zealots. - Not that much different from SC1
3. Resource - 4 gas/pick. 5 mineral/pick. 6 gatherers at start. Unit count at start – Terran = 11, Zerg/Protoss = 10 - Even with two gases at main base, gas seems to be insufficient. I was glad to see two gases at main base but then ran out of gas! - As everyone knows, there is High Yield minerals. I don’t expect there to be a problem with mineral shortage. - Overall, I feel that gas is important. When and how to get it seems to be important during games. 4. Style - Overall, it feels similar to SC1, despite the 3D. Good mixture with WarCraft 3 interface. Nonethless, SC1 users will get used to it. - Macro control doesn’t have as much weight, because of the ability to select many buildings at once. There shouldn’t be a wide range of skills in terms of macro. 5. Overall, it was fun! 90 minutes was a short time. Fun to play, fun to watch. 6. Can SC2 be successful? - It’s very likely. Fun-to-watch part is especially good. Overall, it seems to be a good sequel to SC1. In S. Korea, it’s gonna be a big success. It’s true that not many Blizzard games have failed in the country, and capturing the fun-to-watch component is well-done. It feels more like SC1 than WarCraft 3.
Phoenix faster than an upgraded scout? That's really fast! They should really fix the attack animations. I'm assuming that is the reason for the slight halt.
Automatic resources gathering is convenient, and that extra room for control all goes to unit control.
>.<
It isn't really that bad. I think games would go way faster this way because each player gets minerals and gas so fast for units to get pumped out. Besides, there are these newly introduced "macro mechanics" for each race.
Sounds like Zerg is gonna need to constantly have his eyes on his opponent in SC2 (more than SC1) to keep his economy thriving and still be prepared for any aggressive rush build. x_x I assume 12-hatch-esque builds aren't viable anymore?
Ok this is my compilation of stupid things, better this than tons of negative posts.
Moving shot seems difficult; it halts briefly before attacking
not again, plzzz
Carrier - Interceptors don't move as good as in SC1. Instead of swinging by the opponents and attacking, it feels that they are rotating in a circle. Attacking motion should be faster.
Colossus - it's strong but has short shooting range. It's not easy to use. Warp Prism is not necessary. It's hard to micro this with other units. I pressed "attack" with Colossus and some other units, and Colossus climbed up ahead of other units and was killing Dronge by himself
Nice interesting subjective view on things - always fun
Dont go crazy over certain things and talk balance though, it's just so moot still.. And it really felt like this person wasnt playing all too long? I might be wrong.
On May 22 2009 00:59 DragoonPK wrote: So no JD 2 hatch muta gg no re?
Sounds like it at the moment =/ but we're not even in beta yet and I imagine things will change if it's truly so hard for zerg to do lair tech. I think one of the most important things for SC2 is having a very wide range of b/o options
Thanks for the translation! Sounds pretty good but I hate hearing that fast teching to lair is a bad idea (although I had a similar experience, I was hoping blizzard would change that).
- Main base play is really good! It's incomparable to SC1. In SC1, 7 Marines/1 Medic/1 Dropship play is good, but in SC2, 16 Marines/2 Medivac is even better. Without Banelings or Roaches, Zerg is dead to this strategy.
I don't understand this. He seems be saying, 2 medivacs full of marines is better than 1 dropship full of marines/medic. Seems kind of obvious... Also doesn't the medivac come much later than banelings/roaches?
Thanks for info, tho is waaaaaaay too early to talk about balance. Main thing would be to know how exciting it is, is there enough to do with each race, is interface not too easy etc.
The deal is that until you have gotten the timings in the game down to a science it is always easier to play aggressive early than to expand early, you need to know exactly during which phases it is safe to expand and how to counter every possible rush before you can start to play in more macro heavy styles.
You know, the metagame in games evolve from in the early days just consisting of various cheese until people learns to counter it and then it goes deeper and deeper into macro styles.
6 zerglings have difficulty killing 2 zealots?! oh man this is bad... I would have thought they wouldn't tweak the original units and instead balance with the new units... and lining lings on top of ramps is useless? sounds like defending with zerg is going to be really hard now
if a korean says this. i can rest assured. but im a little disappointed by the 'one base play is good'. i can be at ease though since this is dependent on the map more than the game itself.
I hope they tune down the marauder's hp. 120 hp is way too much for à tier 1 terran unit! ffs, it's as much as a goliath, a mechanic, late tier 2.5 unit in sc1. That quantity of hit points for a tier1 unit should stay with the protoss, it deludes race uniqueness. Way too much for a terran infrantry unit (give it 80 hp max, and adjust unit cost accordingly).
Locating Zerglins in an arch shape on the top of a hill is useless.
Does anyone know what this really means? Is it the hill top 3Dness fucking up the view, or are Zerglings just hard to see in a clump, or what?
Also, I find this quote to be interesting:
One gas is comparable to 0.75 gas in SC1, in terms of macro resource management. Two gasses is comparable to 1.5 gases in SC1. In a main base play, one gas is not sufficient for upgrades and/or gas units.
I wonder how viable 0.75 gas would be? Committing to an extra gas early on can be quite detrimental. I was hoping two gases would be the same as two in SC, but I guess it doesn't really matter.
If 1 base play gets way too popular, I'm pretty sure people will start making maps with high-yield mineral natural expansions, or just natural expansions that are very hard to attack. It's really not a problem.
I'm thinking there will be crazy strategies involving Queen play. I really can't wait any longer...!
On May 22 2009 02:08 spkim1 wrote: 6 zerglings have difficulty killing 2 zealots?! oh man this is bad... I would have thought they wouldn't tweak the original units and instead balance with the new units... and lining lings on top of ramps is useless? sounds like defending with zerg is going to be really hard now
What?
6 lings right now have difficulty beating 2 zealots as well currently when the zealots are microed... sounds relatively similar
i have to remove the 1 base play thing yeah, complainin about 1 base play isnt that important at this moment, but blizzard must be aware that expanding > 1 base play, the way the pplayers reported seemed like it was hard to deal with it anyway.
also it is very sad to read koreans complaining about macro =( i thought everything was ok and the amount of "things to do changing screens" in your base was similar to brood war.
On May 22 2009 04:50 n.DieJokes wrote: Stronger mnm drops you say? Better corsairs you say?! It's all about microing now ?!??! Fucking sc2
How can you consider the Phoenix better than the Corsair given that it has no splash?, is just different.
Probably its going to be useful in PvP and PvT given that air is now a lot more viable for all races, but without splash i very much doubt the Phoenix is gonna be able to hold his ground against Mutas.
And well, we all know about the macro problem, but i guess everyone just accepted it because there were no more arguments about MBS and automine.
On May 22 2009 04:50 n.DieJokes wrote: Stronger mnm drops you say? Better corsairs you say?! It's all about microing now ?!??! Fucking sc2
How can you consider the Phoenix better than the Corsair given that it has no splash?, is just different.
Probably its going to be useful in PvP and PvT given that air is now a lot more viable for all races, but without splash i very much doubt the Phoenix is gonna be able to hold his ground against Mutas.
And well, we all know about the macro problem, but i guess everyone just accepted it because there were no more arguments about MBS and automine.
the new mechanics seemed good enough , atm everybody was thinking that the goal had been reached
Macro was easier, yes, but they didn't say it was removed. They didn't seem to be complaining about it, either. Just that there won't be as wide a skill range, macro-wise. I'm not saying that's a good thing or a bad thing, but it's not always the best idea to read too much into a couple people's experiences.
Also to everybody talking about one base plays. Your freaking nutts 1 base plays made the game exiciting and micro oriented. How can you not love some of boxers 1 base bio-valk builds? 1 base play is what made starcraft so popular, it is more exiciting!
As for one base play, I kind of find it boring. . It can be really exciting and fun to watch, but most of the time they are cheesy or just get run over by macro play. I think macro play is funner to watch and allows for more multitasking. How will Bisu multitask and storm drop 3 bases at once when there's only 1 mineral line to attack (because all races are one basing!?)
On May 22 2009 07:55 Vasoline73 wrote: As for one base play, I kind of find it boring. . It can be really exciting and fun to watch, but most of the time they are cheesy or just get run over by macro play. I think macro play is funner to watch and allows for more multitasking. How will Bisu multitask and storm drop 3 bases at once when there's only 1 mineral line to attack (because all races are one basing!?)
lol
bisu will do that in BW hopefully ;_;
I seriously hope that sc2 will just get their own separate pro-scene. And bw will keep its own. (i also hope that BW one will be a lot more popular!, i'm planning on staying with BW)
On May 22 2009 07:55 Vasoline73 wrote: As for one base play, I kind of find it boring. . It can be really exciting and fun to watch, but most of the time they are cheesy or just get run over by macro play. I think macro play is funner to watch and allows for more multitasking. How will Bisu multitask and storm drop 3 bases at once when there's only 1 mineral line to attack (because all races are one basing!?)
lol
bisu will do that in BW hopefully ;_;
I seriously hope that sc2 will just get their own separate pro-scene. And bw will keep its own. (i also hope that BW one will be a lot more popular!, i'm planning on staying with BW)
if things are to follow this sad direction then QFT
It makes sense that they're trying to buff main base play. Modern Starcraft 1 has evolved so that on most modern maps, everyone has an expansion within the first few minutes of every game. This change should slow it down a little and make taking your first expansion more of a strategic decision than just part of your build order.
On May 22 2009 11:36 sexsexpussyhair wrote: i cant see building macro in sc2, 3d just doesnt provide enough space in main to build like 10 gates...
OK, that is the most ridiculous post so far in this thread. Seriously, what do you mean with 3d not providing enough space for 10 gates? Your sentence doesn't make any sense at all.
1 Base play is fun... Keep in mind you got 1.5 Geysires so you will be able to build more diverse Unitcombos in higher quantities whiteout needing another expansion for the gas as much. AND how long did it take Protoss and Terran to figure out to go for fast Expansions? Terran basically never did it for the longest time and Protoss also took an eternity until it made it to total standart.
6. Can SC2 be successful? - It’s very likely. Fun-to-watch part is especially good. Overall, it seems to be a good sequel to SC1. In S. Korea, it’s gonna be a big success. It’s true that not many Blizzard games have failed in the country, and capturing the fun-to-watch component is well-done. It feels more like SC1 than WarCraft 3.
While discussing balance is futile at this stage, let me at least make a point regarding the one-base play.
If one-base is undesirable and people would rather prefer the SC1-style fast expansion gameplay, wouldn't this just be fixed by simply reducing the geysers at the main to one, while having a double geyser at the nat? Since you won't be able to tech much on 0.75gas, getting that quick nat would be rather essential for any gas strategies, so players would feel forced to expand rather than one-base play.
On May 22 2009 20:39 plated.rawr wrote: While discussing balance is futile at this stage, let me at least make a point regarding the one-base play.
If one-base is undesirable and people would rather prefer the SC1-style fast expansion gameplay, wouldn't this just be fixed by simply reducing the geysers at the main to one, while having a double geyser at the nat? Since you won't be able to tech much on 0.75gas, getting that quick nat would be rather essential for any gas strategies, so players would feel forced to expand rather than one-base play.
On May 22 2009 20:39 plated.rawr wrote: While discussing balance is futile at this stage, let me at least make a point regarding the one-base play.
If one-base is undesirable and people would rather prefer the SC1-style fast expansion gameplay, wouldn't this just be fixed by simply reducing the geysers at the main to one, while having a double geyser at the nat? Since you won't be able to tech much on 0.75gas, getting that quick nat would be rather essential for any gas strategies, so players would feel forced to expand rather than one-base play.
Or just put the gases and minerals on a higher spread in your first base so that your workers needs to travel longer for the same gain, that would probably fix the issue if the issue is even there in the first place without making 1 base play even more useless than it is in sc1.
But the possibilities for map makers to balance this themselves are really endless, can also put 1 of the gasses in the first base at 1000 and the other at 4000 to get a middle ground.
Mineral-only queens can make a huge difference in increasing their use, allowing zerg to mix things up. Also - it'll be interesting in how well the queen's larva spawn rate compares to a hatchery - because if it's even close, then queens will be very very popular, perhaps even displacing hatcheries for many purposes, but will require a lot of attention to use as a larva source. (Do they still spawn larva? I haven't been keeping up.)
On May 22 2009 06:28 CrimsonLotus wrote: Probably its going to be useful in PvP and PvT given that air is now a lot more viable for all races, but without splash i very much doubt the Phoenix is gonna be able to hold his ground against Mutas.
then the phoenix will OWN mutas. Imagine a muta vs. wraith battle- only the wraiths have no cloak, are equivalent to the mutas in cost (125min 75gas vs. 100min 100gas), are 50% more durable (60 points of shields on top of the 120 HP), and don't deal half damage vs. small air units. Oh and the phoenix is also much faster than the muta.
On May 22 2009 23:06 Zona wrote: Mineral-only queens can make a huge difference in increasing their use, allowing zerg to mix things up. Also - it'll be interesting in how well the queen's larva spawn rate compares to a hatchery - because if it's even close, then queens will be very very popular, perhaps even displacing hatcheries for many purposes, but will require a lot of attention to use as a larva source. (Do they still spawn larva? I haven't been keeping up.)
According to recent info, for 25 energy a Queen can spawn 4 extra larva on a Hatchery. I'm not sure if there's a cooldown on that, or what? Well, I guess it's certainly limited by minerals. Late game, though, you could certainly reproduce an army pretty quickly, if you have enough hatcheries and the cash. That's certainly "Zerg" like. (Even more so)
On May 22 2009 23:06 Zona wrote: Mineral-only queens can make a huge difference in increasing their use, allowing zerg to mix things up. Also - it'll be interesting in how well the queen's larva spawn rate compares to a hatchery - because if it's even close, then queens will be very very popular, perhaps even displacing hatcheries for many purposes, but will require a lot of attention to use as a larva source. (Do they still spawn larva? I haven't been keeping up.)
According to recent info, for 25 energy a Queen can spawn 4 extra larva on a Hatchery. I'm not sure if there's a cooldown on that, or what? Well, I guess it's certainly limited by minerals. Late game, though, you could certainly reproduce an army pretty quickly, if you have enough hatcheries and the cash. That's certainly "Zerg" like. (Even more so)
That will mean that you basically needs 1 queen per hatchery since they said the amount of eggs per hatch were limited to 5, but it also means that it gives more production speed than a hatchery.
So they showed SC2 to a bunch of korean newbs? Who cares! I want to see what Boxer, Oov, Savior, Jaedong, Bisu, Stork (etc..) say about it, not what the D- crowd feels. Or even worse, the WarCraft 3 crowd feels.
On May 23 2009 03:10 SoleSteeler wrote: I'm pretty sure you're still only allowed one queen, which is part of the reason they're so cheap and don't cost any gas.
On May 23 2009 03:21 JohnBall wrote: So they showed SC2 to a bunch of korean newbs? Who cares! I want to see what Boxer, Oov, Savior, Jaedong, Bisu, Stork (etc..) say about it, not what the D- crowd feels. Or even worse, the WarCraft 3 crowd feels.
On May 23 2009 03:21 JohnBall wrote: So they showed SC2 to a bunch of korean newbs? Who cares! I want to see what Boxer, Oov, Savior, Jaedong, Bisu, Stork (etc..) say about it, not what the D- crowd feels. Or even worse, the WarCraft 3 crowd feels.
D- korean newbs?
As amazing as that sounds, not every korean is a pro. And some of them even are D-! Wow, who would have thought, huh?
On May 23 2009 03:21 JohnBall wrote: So they showed SC2 to a bunch of korean newbs? Who cares! I want to see what Boxer, Oov, Savior, Jaedong, Bisu, Stork (etc..) say about it, not what the D- crowd feels. Or even worse, the WarCraft 3 crowd feels.
D- korean newbs?
As amazing as that sounds, not every korean is a pro. And some of them even are D-! Wow, who would have thought, huh?
Now, how do you know that those koreans are D- newbs?
On May 23 2009 03:21 JohnBall wrote: So they showed SC2 to a bunch of korean newbs? Who cares! I want to see what Boxer, Oov, Savior, Jaedong, Bisu, Stork (etc..) say about it, not what the D- crowd feels. Or even worse, the WarCraft 3 crowd feels.
Seriously bro. Amen.
When will reporters learn that unless they have played the prequel for a living at some point in their lives their opinion derived from playing Starcraft 2 early is meaningless.
On May 23 2009 03:21 JohnBall wrote: So they showed SC2 to a bunch of korean newbs? Who cares! I want to see what Boxer, Oov, Savior, Jaedong, Bisu, Stork (etc..) say about it, not what the D- crowd feels. Or even worse, the WarCraft 3 crowd feels.
Seriously bro. Amen.
When will reporters learn that unless they have played the prequel for a living at some point in their lives their opinion derived from playing Starcraft 2 early is meaningless.
Indeed. The only thing worse than the opinion of SC non-pro players is the opinion of - shudder - Warcraf 3 players!
On May 23 2009 03:21 JohnBall wrote: So they showed SC2 to a bunch of korean newbs? Who cares! I want to see what Boxer, Oov, Savior, Jaedong, Bisu, Stork (etc..) say about it, not what the D- crowd feels. Or even worse, the WarCraft 3 crowd feels.
Seriously bro. Amen.
When will reporters learn that unless they have played the prequel for a living at some point in their lives their opinion derived from playing Starcraft 2 early is meaningless.
Indeed. The only thing worse than the opinion of SC non-pro players is the opinion of - shudder - Warcraf 3 players!
I'd sooner eat a frozen pop-tart than read something spewed from the wretched fingers of anyone who has enjoyed Warcraft 3.
Yeah screw peoples opinions who played the game? They probably want to make SC2 into WC3: Warcraft in Space! How could anything they say have any validity at all? How foolish!
I'd sooner eat a frozen pop-tart than read something spewed from the wretched fingers of anyone who has enjoyed Warcraft 3.
Games aren't for enjoying! Especially cheap knock off games of the only good game in existance, Starcraft: Broodwar. Don't spread misinformation! Do not have fun!
lets focus on the good: Game Speed Quick battles visual Terran is awesome weee~~ mutalisks
and the bad things of star2:
macro still need some tweaks a possible nerf in 1 base play? encouraging expanding(high yield minerals are a two edged knife, turtiling with two bases but mining at 3 rate is just blah, we want heavy macro games, 3/4 expos 40 gateways pumping gaylots sup~) Moving shot of phoenix still need to be fixed ( other flyers has been said to work properly)
bring points to discuss =/ we arent here to flame wc3 or random korean players that could be A players or D players.
I told my opponents I would go for macro-later-game styles. But I experimented some strategies and played speedy games. I apologize!
This means that they (he) didn't try to do any macro-style games. I really think we're reading way too much into the "one base-style" play.
A valid concern for me is no quick Lair tech ... But who knows the true skill of these players? It's fun to talk about all this stuff, but no one should get all worked up about it. There's so many variables we don't know about how this all went down.
Things like balance aren't really important at this stage in the game. What's most important is how the game plays and feels, and it's great to hear that SC2 lives up to its predecessor in that regard.
It sounds to me like mutas will be pretty poor in small groups, with both terran and protoss holding such nice stats on base air units. This is probably a good thing, as it helps to make Zerg feel more Zergy by having to mass the mutas to compensate. And stacking mutas still works by memory, but they separate at a larger rate when poorly micro'd. Which basically forces a player to spend more screen time on a group of stacked mutas than was previously required.
We already know that roaches require more micro to keep them in top form, and with hydra's doing more damage with less survivability, Zerg may well be the most micro intensive race in SC2 to get to a decent level of play.
- Main base play is really good! It's incomparable to SC1. In SC1, 7 Marines/1 Medic/1 Dropship play is good, but in SC2, 16 Marines/2 Medivac is even better. Without Banelings or Roaches, Zerg is dead to this strategy.
I don't understand this. He seems be saying, 2 medivacs full of marines is better than 1 dropship full of marines/medic. Seems kind of obvious... Also doesn't the medivac come much later than banelings/roaches?
he's explaining you can get that in the same time it would take you to get that in the old game. think about it. barracks can make marines at double speed with reactor and you don't need to build an academy for a medic...just the starport(plus addon?) for the dropship... it's seems true that the medivac does come later than those units...i think his point is that you can't skip the first tier units with zerg against terrans.
On May 22 2009 05:44 SuperArc wrote: Six zerglings can kill two zealots? o.o
3 zerglings is roughly equal to one zealot on open ground in sc1, zealots are only better once the zerglings starts to lack space to attack.
yeah...idk about sc2...but in starcraft i was able to take out 4 zerglings with one zealot at the beginning of the game consistently by moving him in between my buildings...so yeah like he said...if the zerglings can surround the zealots...it gets harder for the zealots.
overall, if it's true like what he said about zerg needing those tier 1 units to stop that drop, that's great...i remember zerg needing the tier 2 units to stop the drop. that's a big improvement for zerg and a step forward rather than backward, no mistake about it.
http://sclegacy.com/ Might want to update the OP with another translation of the event.
The gameplay speed was even more surprising. The rampant guesses and opinions that came to be until now were incinerated in one blow, the game being host to a fast sense of speed. From the speed of Probes mining minerals to the movement and attack speeds of the Zealots and Zerglings, and also the rate at which units killed and died in the middle of a battle. The speed was approximately 1.5 times faster than the current ‘Star’. Thanks to this, in the small time I was fiddling with the game I found difficulty in using all my accumulated minerals,
lol SC2 is faster? :O
also
Blizzard threw away magnificence and chose comfort. And, in actuality, the playing of the game is definitely geared towards accepting the matches of pro gamers.
On May 24 2009 14:40 Tsagacity wrote: http://sclegacy.com/ Might want to update the OP with another translation of the event.
Infinite unit selection but a 24 unit limit per hotkey?, i like it, makes a lot easyer moving your army around but at the same time the hotkey limit means its not going to be so easy to engage correctly in large battles.
On May 23 2009 03:21 JohnBall wrote: So they showed SC2 to a bunch of korean newbs? Who cares! I want to see what Boxer, Oov, Savior, Jaedong, Bisu, Stork (etc..) say about it, not what the D- crowd feels. Or even worse, the WarCraft 3 crowd feels.
Seriously bro. Amen.
When will reporters learn that unless they have played the prequel for a living at some point in their lives their opinion derived from playing Starcraft 2 early is meaningless.
Indeed. The only thing worse than the opinion of SC non-pro players is the opinion of - shudder - Warcraf 3 players!
Yeah who the fuck wants to hear the opinion that will be shared by the majority of those buying the game? Give me pro gamers and ONLY pro gamers
On May 24 2009 14:40 Tsagacity wrote: http://sclegacy.com/ Might want to update the OP with another translation of the event.
Infinite unit selection but a 24 unit limit per hotkey?, i like it, makes a lot easyer moving your army around but at the same time the hotkey limit means its not going to be so easy to engage correctly in large battles.
A nice compromise.
I think that was a bit of a mistranslation. I believe that it just SHOWS (as in the wireframes) 24 units, and then you have to click the little tabs on the right to view other units. Still a bit of a compromise when you consider tab skill usage, etc. But you should still be able to move 256 or whatever units on one hotkey. It'll still be better to group different units apart though, for sure.
On May 24 2009 14:40 Tsagacity wrote: http://sclegacy.com/ Might want to update the OP with another translation of the event.
Infinite unit selection but a 24 unit limit per hotkey?, i like it, makes a lot easyer moving your army around but at the same time the hotkey limit means its not going to be so easy to engage correctly in large battles.
A nice compromise.
Even if it wasn't a misquote I would still not call it much of a compromise. 24 units per key on 4 hotkeys is still enough for pretty much any army that doesn't include zerglings, and with MBS players are going to have plenty of hotkey space.
Managing your entire army will still be very easy, and separate hotkeys is probably a good idea for any half-decent player if they need to separate or flank.
EPT![[image loading]](http://wire.ggl.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/scbattlecruiser.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.starcraft2weblog.com/wp-content/uploads/starcraft2screenshot4.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.starcraft2weblog.com/wp-content/uploads/starcraft2screenshot2.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://tbn2.google.com/images?q=tbn:CGaO8TotmfgkQM:http://tombammann.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/ss5-hires.jpg)
