Official Starcraft 2 Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steven p jobs

just got the brutal ffa achievement. I cheesed it though. Lifted my base off to a remote island, turtled there, waited until only one opponent was left, and brought in a fleet of battlecruisers.

---

hax.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kamakazie

There's a few DotA games up already. XD

---

What are they called? I'm a little confused with the custom game interface.

speaking of custom game types, does anyone remember that custom one from Warcraft 3, I think it was called Vampire Hunters or something similar...I used to play the crap out of that lol, it was fun and I wouldn't be surprised if there will be something similar in SC2.

Oh wow... so I'd have to spend $180 to play all 3 campaigns?! WTH?!
I'm sooo boycotting this one! (yeah right... just read "I will wait till it's below $30")

And yeah, D3 better not be like this for each class!! o_O

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by proxops-pete

Oh wow... so I'd have to spend $180 to play all 3 campaigns?! WTH?!
I'm sooo boycotting this one! (yeah right... just read "I will wait till it's below $30")

And yeah, D3 better not be like this for each class!! o_O

---

Nope, they are expansions. So the other campaigns will be between 30 and 40 dollars at launch.

Each campaign is 28-30 missions which is ~90 total compared to SCI's which was 30 total (10 terran, 10 protoss, 10 zerg.) I would rather have 90 with a long story line than 10 of each race.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by proxops-pete

Oh wow... so I'd have to spend $180 to play all 3 campaigns?! WTH?!
I'm sooo boycotting this one! (yeah right... just read "I will wait till it's below $30")

And yeah, D3 better not be like this for each class!! o_O

---

I don't think that pricing for the other games have been officially announced yet. I think people are assuming that they will be the full $60.

Starcraft 2, as it is now, is absolutely worth $60. Even though people think "OMG?!?! Terran only?!?!?! That's only 1/3rd of the game!"... you're still getting a single-player campaign which is 27 missions long (more than most RTS games). Those missions are all very well-created, and not your typical build-a-base-then-destroy-the-enemy's-base. Plus, you get all of the in-game and in-mission storytelling through cutscenes, and an RPG system that allows you to upgrade and buy mercenaries.

And of course, you also get the multiplayer. There's the basic SC2 multiplayer game, but you also get custom modes where you find maps like Last Stand and Tower Defense games. You also get an achievements system, plus access to the Battle.net ecosystem.

Starcraft 2 isn't a game. It's a platform. The game is simply there to show off the power and capabilities of the platform. I was skeptical at first, but now I'm 100% convinced that Starcraft 2 is an absolutely amazing product, and is definitely worth every penny of $60.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Timman_24

Each campaign is 28-30 missions which is ~90 total compared to SCI's which was 30 total (10 terran, 10 protoss, 10 zerg.) I would rather have 90 with a long story line than 10 of each race.

---

I 100% agree. They might be labeled or marketed as "expansions", but if there are 30 missions in each game, I easily consider them to have the same amount of content as a full standalone game. The only concern that I have is that we don't know when those other campaigns are coming out.... soon, I hope.

And I think Blizzard is being smart with this game. They are definitely taking advantage of Starcraft II to create lore and storyline behind the Starcraft universe. This can only be good for them, since it gives them the ability to develop other games based on that universe - exactly like how the traditionally-RTS Warcraft universe was turned into the MMORPG World of Warcraft.

I doubt they'll be released as expansions (with "expansion" prices).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gamespot

Pardo noted that each release will be a fully fledged campaign, featuring 26 to 30 missions apiece. The celebrity World of Warcraft designer also noted that while the ending of each game will be set, the middle of the game will play heavily to player choice, allowing for branching storylines. Pardo also said that the second two releases could be considered expansion packs, but that "we really want them to feel like stand-alone products."

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1up

As for pricing -- a big concern for gamers who fear this may be a ploy to sell the same game three times -- neither Sigaty nor Pardo were ready to give any details. "You know, we haven't even talked about that yet," said Sigaty. "I don't know. They're definitely full-sized games. I mean, the scope will be big; it's going to be 26 to 30 missions in the first one, and we intend to have at least that much in the next after that."
Pardo was also quick to explain that the pricing will depend on how much content is in each release. "We would do the retail price based on the value that we're putting in the box," he said. "So, if the value in the box is less than the original, then we're going to price it like that. We're not just trying to get people to pay full-price for something that's less; if the follow-ups end up having the feature set of an expansion, then that's how they'll get priced."

---

They seemed a lot like paving the way for three full price games at the time (those were reactions to the "trilogy" news)

Kotaku had an article which pegs them as expansions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Timman_24

Kotaku had an article which pegs them as expansions.

---

Correct, but no info on price. It could be any where from 30 to 60.

Each expansion will also have its one online ladder bracket and competition system.

So in theory, this expansions could be treated a stand alone games. However, having all 3 might unlock some special content. A little similar to what DOW did. I'm not saying that's true, but just an idea I was thinking about.

Honestly, I think Blizzard could charge more then average expansion and people would still pay.

If i'm on a map where they have a remote isolated island area where I can build up my econ I always do. Air defense IMHO is cheaper and more affective then ground defense. In fact one game I just did that form the get go.

You know Terrans have a very unqiue advantage in the ability to lift off their command center. I saw one player use this very effectively he did the normal play etc. He expanded and when his main base ran out of resources he just lifted his command center and put it another expansion, his 2nd expansion ran out too (this was a long drawn out game) he did the same.

Although the storage depots being able to burrow them is a life saver. Makes blocking off so much easier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nik00117

If i'm on a map where they have a remote isolated island area where I can build up my econ I always do. Air defense IMHO is cheaper and more affective then ground defense. In fact one game I just did that form the get go.

You know Terrans have a very unqiue advantage in the ability to lift off their command center. I saw one player use this very effectively he did the normal play etc. He expanded and when his main base ran out of resources he just lifted his command center and put it another expansion, his 2nd expansion ran out too (this was a long drawn out game) he did the same.

Although the storage depots being able to burrow them is a life saver. Makes blocking off so much easier.

---

There are other uses for the Terrans' ability to Lift Off. For example, you can build a barracks.

When that is done, immediately build a tech lab add-on on the barracks and a factory at the same time. They should complete simultaneously. When they are done being built, use lift off on your barracks and factory. Land your factory next to the tech lab which will still be on the ground. Now you can roll out siege tanks and marines in only 2 build cycles.

Look up the youtube channel HDStarcraft, and find a video called "Tutorials: Terran 1-1-1". It taught me so much about how to play terran

Lots and lots of Protoss players lately. They all seem to do the same thing; fast tech to Dark Templar. I'm really favoring 2-3 gates then starport, which seems to beat anything in bronze and silver. I no longer 4 gate with toss and have won 6 games straight since relying heavily on void rays. Terran players should stick with marines, maruaders, medvacks, and ghosts. The 1-1-1 Terran is good for almost any situation, unless it's a Protoss who gets an early starport.

Dark Templar rushes never work in higher level leagues, because all good players scout early and scout often. They can smell a Dark Templar rush comign from a mile away (once they see that tall Dark Shrine), and can build inexpensive ways to defend against the squishy Dark Templars.

If someone DT-rushed me, I'd be more than happy to sit there quietly while they throw all those resources building their useless units.

Mass Stalkers are hard to beat considering all the flexibility you get with them with blink. Also, having the cannon as the single best piece of base defense there is doesn't hurt. I play Zerg mainly, but have dabbled in Protoss since they have a lot of advantages.