Poll: Which race will you play as your main in SC2?

Time to learn some Zerg wouldn't you say?

Zerg units get slaughtered precisely because of their overwhelming numbers. No other race can afford that kind of wild play style.

Anyway, Ych9, I recommend Terran. Come release day, if you are absolutely overtaken by the coolness of another race, then by all means go with your heart. But if even by then it is impossible for you to come down with a decision, just remember that there once was a complete stranger on the internet who also loves SC that told you to go with Terran.

 

Well, now that terrans have muge mech walkers and seem to have been watching gundam, evangelion, etc. I thin that they have mech'd their way into my top race for SC2.

 

right now im goin with zerg but im not completly sure i wanna see some zerg units in SC2 1st

 

I'm not saying that you should wait for the patches to come out before playing the other races, or totally committing to them. I just think it will be unbalanced in the beginning, and especially the beta. I'm really interested in warning first time players not to get turned off the game because they want to play a certain race and they're having a hard time at the first release of the game.

I was simply suggesting that just like SC1 you start out playing Protoss and work from that point with whatever race you feel you want to.

Even though I've argued that Protoss will be the strongest, I will be playing Zerg. Most definitely. BTW, someone really needs to rape Pixar for stealing the name....

 

I personally think it won't be that bad when first released. I mean this is Blizzard we are talking about and when Warcraft 3 came out it was pretty good in terms of balance. The only flaws in balance I saw were very minor. They weren't to the extent that one race or unit had a big advantage over another.

So considering their past works I say the only problems will be minor.

 

If you consider WC3's balance of being the SAME units for each race with different designs (a warcraft 3 trait) and then heroes (which made strategy irrelevant) then yes, WC3 was balanced.

Now consider StarCraft with innumerable combinations of units. Then take into account that Protoss is already the strongest race (they cost more, eh?) and the other races will undoubtedly have to catch up. The question is whether they will shrink the gap during the beta.

 

Warcraft 3 was balanced in the sense that no one race had a large advantage over another and its true that Heros can greatly change the tide of the battle but everyone had one as well so it was balanced in terms of how the game was played.

In my opinion stragety wasn't irrelevent in Warcraft 3 it was just a different kind of startegy with using your heros and items in conjunction with your army.

Anyway to get more back on topic, what makes you think Starcraft 2 won't be balanced, and that the Protoss won't be balanced because their single units are stronger in terms of hitpoints and damage and that making them cost more both with population and minerals wont work as it has in the first Starcraft?

 

Let me set what I've said straight and a little more clearly....

I think SC2 is going to be even better than SC1. I think the game will be absolutely balanced and will end up being the greatest RTS to date.

HOWEVER, I do feel that the Protoss are going to be stronger coming out of the gate simply based on the strength of individual units. For example(totally hypothetical because these units are already figured out from SC1) it is going to take a while to figure out how many zerglings it will take to kill one zealot, or how many versus 2 or 3 or 4 because the game is so variable. HP will be adjusted just like it was in the original SC with patches. Not all problems will be fixed when the game is originally released. It won't be enough to be noticed if the two players are unmatched, but if two equal players duke it out, it will make a difference.

 

i still go with human, i love all the machine and gun and stuff.
tho protoss is ok with me too
i Hate zergs,......why?.....well.....i hate bugs......

 

Joneagle_X what you said is true in that there will undoubtedly be balance changes and tweaks over many patches after initial release.  However, none of it accounts for Protoss being automatically the strongest race initially at release.

It can easily be any other race as SC1 balance was never achieved by directly balancing unit stats against each other.  Even at the current patch, Zerg units fall miserably short when compared to Toss in terms of individual unit stats.  But the truth is, Blizzard could just as easily over-compensate Zerg for Toss unit strength, and that Zerg is overall the stronger race.  That's not something you can tell right now.

 

Damn right it's gonna be the best!

Well, i am going to say this:

It is a bit like Rock, Paper Scissors.
Protoss wins against Zerg and Terran through their resilience and good mix of melee and ranged units, but they lose on the cost and food front i.e that they are friggin expensive.
Terran wins against Protoss and Zerg with their superior firepower, but lose on the melee front entirely, and while still being moderately resilient (more so than Zerg) they have nowhere near the endurance of Protoss.
Zerg wins against Protoss and Terran in sheer damage spread, cheapness and foremost, their strength in numbers , while Protoss and Terran have powerful yet slow attacks, the Zerg have faster, weaker attacks that in the long run deals more damage, but lack big time on the resilience front.

Just one more thing:
Zerg - Glass cannons.
Terrans - Sniper rifle.
Protoss - Death Star. (note the pun on their expensiveness)

 

Excatly SirBaron, the strength of a race doesn't just depend on individual unit stats. There is much more to take in account like attack speed, movement speed, ablities and so forth. Even though the zealot may be stronger compared to lets say zerglings, zerglings still come in more numbers, attack more rapidly and dont take nearly as much resources as a zealot.

So I think just unit stats and cost is not enough alone to base if its gonna be overpowered or not. There may be a few rough edges when it first comes out I agree but like I said before I don't its gonna be anything major like a race being overpowered.

 

I guess I'm not articulating the point clearly enough although I certainly like your guys' responses much better than the usual "you're just an idiot."

Feel free to let me know if my theory is way off base, but if I were to be designing a game and had the different races, I would also start with one race, and historically Blizzard has developed the Protoss first. They did this in SC1 and there are indications that they did the same for SC2 since Protoss was the first race to be revealed.

Now, if you have one race that is complete, and is supposed to be the statistically strongest based on single units, wouldn't you develop the other races to compensate, but not OVER compensate for that strength? It is absolutely true that Zerg or Terran might end up being stronger than the other races, but I find it highly unlikely. I think the tweaks will be mostly aimed at the Zerg to either raise HP or attack speed, or lower costs.

In fact, until the game is fully playable and out of beta, we won't know.

 

I understand what you are saying and it is quite a possiblity, but I'm hoping that Blizzard which is known for its gameplay and balance won't come to that. They are gonna go through extensive balancing testing and since their release date so far is "when its done" they will have the time they need to get as right as they want it.

We will really just have to wait and see and hope Blizzard knows what they are doing as much as we like to think they are.

 

Joneagle_X we all know, at least I know, what you're saying but it just doesn't come to the conclusion you are making logically.

The very fact that SC isn't an arena style game where everything is on equal terms when you duke it out makes your Protoss units are the strongest argument useless, that is completely irrelevant. You have made the mistake of assuming an irrelevant proof as a postulate. In SC1 for example, Protoss was the only race without a high mobility high movement speed hit-and-run harassment unit at tier 2. Zerg on the other hand, had only one viable caster where as others had 3. Zerg also had no ground siege unit at all. But all of it was balanced, because individual unit strength never directly dictated balance. Maybe in a game where there are some kind of mutually limiting factor, such as turns or unit count limit(as opposed to food limit), but in SC it is in no way a direct and absolute influence.

While no doubt SC2 won't be balanced right at launch, but what you said about how Blizzard will make sure they will not overcompensate makes no sense at all, it goes against logic. Then are you saying Blizzard will consciously undercompensate? Of course that will not be the case, Blizzard will aim for perfect balance right at initial release even though it most likely won't happen. Some units will be overpowered and some will be under-powered, but somehow you think that all OP will fall on one race only, while all under-powered stuff will magically steer away from Protoss and land on other races? The realistic answer is no.

I noticed that you threw out the ever classic "historically..." very nice, but the fact is, historically SC1 has never had a history during development. It had no sequel, there was no previous examples and experience to set a guideline for the devs to learn from and go by like this time. You say because Blizz did so in the past Toss will be OP at release, but it is just as likely if not much more likely that because Blizz did so in the past that will be one of the things that they will consciously avoid. By that logic, Blizzard will almost certainly launch with Protoss as the weakest race, but that's not good logic either.

But none of that matter, because the truth is that no one can tell, not even Blizzard. However, somehow you seem to think you can draw that conclusion even though the evidence and proofs you present do not directly support your proposition. The chances of Protoss to be OP at release is 33.3%, and of course this is all first assuming that SC2 will not be balanced at launch naturally. 33.3% chance, It is that unlikely, or just as likely, depending on how you want to look at it.

You are passing variables as facts and making connections between unrelated facts solely by assumption, that's why it doesn't add up to your conclusion yet you still believe it. You need to first examine the relevance of a supporting proof before you can present it as absolute and argue its logic. Say C is true if B is true, but even if A is true it doesn't mean C is true if A never had anything to do with B in the first place. So saying A is true, so then B is true, therefore C is true is flawed logic, because you yourself took the liberty of making a connection between A and B.

 

Why is it, that Remy's post make me want to have sex with him? Its not just me is it?

But yeah Johnny ol' boy. Of course Protoss are in a way "Stronger" than any other race and would win in a stand up fight, thats the way it was in sc1 too. If you got Lot rushed as a terran you could very well be screwed, because your early boys couldn't stand up to the sheer power of Lots. But who the hell fights protoss on their terms man? If you attack with Collosi, i'll kill you with Viking Air or Thors. If you attack with Zealots i'll use Cobra's and Banshee's if you attack with Immortals, i'll attack with M&M's.

Just because with each tier, the protoss have higher stats higher damage etc. does not mean that they will instantly defeat their enemies no matter what. It's not always Tier 1 vs Tier 1 or Tier 2 vs Tier 2. Hell no, it's completely different.

 

Wow... I didn't think I would get chewed out for that

Remy, I totally understand your criticism. I'm basing my opinion--and that's an OPINION--on what I remember from the original release of StarCraft. I could go look it up in the individual patches released, but I believe it took 2 patches before the game was considered "balanced," and many more patches were made after that to perfect it. Therefore, my comment about the "history" of the game rings quite true. Also, don't forget the expansion pack. Rebalancing took place there as well; your statement that there is no historical evidence is just as much a blatant assumption as you said my statements were.

You are right about the statistical chances of any one race being stronger than the other being roughly equivalent, but don't you think, if you suppose that Blizzard did develop the Protoss before the other races, that it is likely they will be the race favored in development? I certainly do. I've said nothing about an individual unit turning the battle and unbalancing the whole game in the early, middle, and late stages. That doesn't happen in SC and it won't happen in SC2.

My only point is that I will be very suprised if a patch doesn't come out less than 3 weeks after release in an effort to rebalance the game, and it is aimed at reigning the Protoss in because of their dominance. I think most SC players would agree with me on this.

Of course, each race will be stronger at different points in the game if you go by what you're saying. Face it, in the early stages of the game there's only really a couple types of basic units you'll be using, and if they're even slightly unbalanced, game over. Don't tell me that a single unit doesn't have an effect. Now later in the game this might not be so as a lurker might be extraordinarily powerful but can be easily countered by an air unit. Players will adapt.

I don't think my supposition was worth an attack on my logic. This is, after all, a question which cannot be answered and it is very difficult to find actual proof when the games are balanced so carefully and with such tiny adjustments.

Trust me, I don't want to make you mad in any way, but your attack seemed hypocritical to me in that you are making such assumptions about my argument when you just attacked my post for doing so. I think SC2 is going to be the best RTS ever released. I was just pointing out that Blizzard needs to be careful about the way they develop the Protoss in relation to the other races.

Thanks for the opinion.

 

Hmmm... too bad you took it as an attack. I don't get to "chew" anyone out, I'm just a poster, I say what I think. I don't know why you should care if I'm mad, but anger or resentment was not the reason behind me posting my reply. I read, I disagreed, I posted.

About the history thing, I don't think you understood what I meant. I am actually personally quite aware that it took many patches to balance SC1, and there will undoubted many to come for SC2. What I was actually saying was that SC1 didn't have a history during development because it was StarCraft ONE. We now have a "historically..." to reflect on because this is the development of SC2, the history is of its predecessor SC1. That is a differentiating factor in that the devs never had anything to look back to, to learn from to avoid mistakes, but this time they do. I don't really understand how you got what you got from what I said, but I do admit that my wording was less than perfectly clear.

Every single unit has an effect, but you are basing your opinion based on unit stats, which isn't what directly dictates balance. And you are also assuming because of stats Protoss will have all the OP units at launch by default. That is already two assumptions right there. I'm not attacking your logic, but you can not argue something by logical deduction when you are using assumption as proof.

You argument that Blizzard having started on development of Protoss first will thus favor them and consequently produce an imbalance leaning in favor of Protoss is again illogical. They will not favor something and create an imbalance. They will be the ones getting right back to work after two sips of champaign at launch just to go back and make patches to fix the imbalances they put into the game. Blizzard will not favor anything. No matter how much you want to believe otherwise, it is in their own best interest in every way to put out a final product that is as close to complete and utter perfect balance at launch as they humanly can. Professionalism, sense of accomplishment, peace of mind, fat Chirstmas bonus, fame and renown, popularity with fans, future sales, reputation, or still something else. I don't know which of these or even all of these you find feasible to be the motivation behind the SC2 devs, but any and all reasons will push them to strive toward perfect balance and the hell away from favoring anything in the game, let alone a whole race.

I also disagree that most SC players will agree with you in that Protoss would be OP at launch. The more normal and logical response from the average SC fan would be it could just as well be any race that ends up being OP. I read posts that I disagree with very carefully, but I just don't see any real evidence that supports your theory. They do provide a reason for the formation of your opinion, but certainly not directly supportive as to convince someone else.

Even in this last post of yours, you do not actually make a real connection from "something will be OP at launch" to "it will be Protoss." The only things close to a logical explanation is because it happened before and Protoss units have the strongest individual stats, both of which I've already touched on as to why they do not equate to Protoss being OP. As far as I can see, your argument stopped right at "something will be OP at launch."

 

So upon what "fact," other than your own assumptions about how Blizzard works do you base your assertion that Blizzard doesn't favor the Protoss?

And also, don't think I'm taking offense to your post. I'm just posing food for thought.... and maybe a little black sheep wall .

It looks like it's going to be about 10 years between the two releases.... I doubt very much that the development team contains too many of the original programmers. Their bias could completely change, but the common perspective is that the Blizzard development team has tended to "love," if you will, the Protoss.

I don't really know how this became a discussion of logic, but as I've said before, this isn't really a question that can be definitively answered.

Don't assume that Blizzard will learn from the past mistakes, even if they can be called mistakes. I still think SC beats the bejesus out of most games released, EVER! It is certainly #1 on my all-time gaming list, and I expect it to be surmounted by SC2.

I have two complaints: Protoss is quite clearly the most developed race as of now, and therefore was MOST LIKELY started first, and unless they have completely separate teams developing each of the races I would chance to guess their team room sounded a little like this:

Blizz1: "Hey, did you see that kick ass Immortal we just came up with?"

Blizz2: "Yea, I think I'm gonna shit a Zergling at their amazingness."

Blizz3: "So what will we come up with to match the Immortal for Terran or Zerg?"

Blizz1: "Awww, we'll think of something. We'll just come up with a new concept that makes cool farting noises but won't quite match up at first."

Blizz2: "Yeah, it's okay, we'll fix it... So long as the Protoss PWN! mpa hack on!!1"

Now, I'm not saying Blizzard is totally biased toward the Protoss, but it has been evident. Don't tell me there isn't a similarity between Protoss being more powerful in SC1 at first release and then Protoss being developed first in SC2. It's way too much of a coincidence.

 

I can't even follow this argument anymore. If you ask me, there is no way to know for sure that a race will be unbalanced at all, let alone knowing for sure that it will be the Protoss. There are always variables that are not taken into account when trying to make assumptions like this. But, rest assured, after a few month's worth of patches, the game will be balanced.