Starcraft 2 FAQ & Critique Video

[img width=670 height=187]http://www.starcraft2forum.org/gallery/335_13_08_07_2_05_26.jpg[/img]​

Wlck742 has found a Starcraft 2 FAQ by the Blue Report Blog. Some notable quotes that Wlck742 has found that will interest many people:

There are many other answers like Thor speed and Blink cooldown rate. You can find the blog here. Powerups to Wlck742 for finding this! ^_^

An interesting video I found is titled "What's Wrong With Starcraft 2" It is pretty good at pointing out some things that needs to be changed, but it also shows some of the positives too. Feel free to discuss it in the news thread. Hopefully there will be more new updates in the very near future. C'mon zerg! ^_^

Related Links
Discussion of the FAQ
SC2 FAQ - Blue Report Blog
What's Wrong With Starcraft 2?

 

oh no and entire video bashing starcraft 2! burn him at the stake!

......




on a more serious note, I'd rather have reavers as building killers than soul hunters.

 

I'd also like to point out this piece:

"Q: Were Reavers really taken out of the game?
A: Reavers were taken out of the game, but their abilities were put on different units. They are doing this with a lot of units apparently, so you aren’t losing the abilities."

Odd, as the only abilities Reavers had was Scarabs and being the slowest unit in the game. Perhaps another unit fires the scarabs? Probably Colossus would get that, but then there's not much point in removing reavers.

 

maybe carriers make reavers and interceptors ZOMG... kidding

I agree with basically everything in the video except that reapers are not the replacement of the firebat. They aren't even made at the barracks. They are a vulture.

 

no reavers are pretty useless,
there role as anti unit is taken by the colosuss
thier role as a seige weapon is taken by the warp ray.

i agree with his point about the colossus, but you can apply that to many differnet things(like the whole of starcraft2 what can a marine do to a mothership for an example), like the reaver.

 

The video was how i say, interesting... however i do not agree with quite afew of the things they said, mostly in there coments about the clossi and the siege tank, and the marine, and the rock v paper thing, and well the list goes on but any way it does raise some interesting concerns about the game (amazingly most of them are about the way units look).

 

A colosus fireing a scarab? are you kidind, and war of the worlds is one of my favorate books thatnk you very much!

And now for a bunch more:

I don't see how reapers can replace fire bats! Can a reaper single handedly mow down contless zerglings, NO!

The new terran buildings looks cooler if you ask me, though they are right about unit identification.

The mother ship is a bit to power full with black hole but but there should still be just one, making "planet craker" look like its from Independence day is an AMAZING IDEA(keep the area of efect) and I think that the time bubble is great.

I'd like the viking to fire a constant stream of bullets like a real gatling gun and not in bursts, just visual though.

and in name of god and all that is good: KEEP THOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Deleted previous posts. Please read the forum rules and do not double post.

 

Yeah the new Terran buildings looks awesome the bunker looks blocky...but it's still awesome!!!
and oh yeah lock and load didn't you post the same thing?

 

@lock and load: Since you seem to take my scarab shooting colossus comment so seriously, I'll have to explain you that I was kidding. I don't want any scarabs to pop out of the colossus, I was just comparing one seige/heavy assault unit to another since some other unit gained its ability.

 

It is pretty hard to identify different units. I think they have too much flare on each unit. Reapers have flaring jet packs, siege tanks create smoke and big explosions, when units die they also cause huge explosions, lazers cover up ground targets (Personally the soul hunter lazer is the best at not doing this). Everything seems really dark too which kinda makes everything blend in. Also all the protoss are either gold or silver which makes them blend together. They need to make everything a little brighter imo and make explosions and stuff not too dramatic. They said they were trying to make it easy to identify units but they need to work on that harder. The problem i have with firebats is they are ONLY good against zerglings and kind of against Zealots. Can they raid bases on their own and blow up buildings effectively? No! I like the Reaper much better than the firebat and honestly I hope they leave the firebat out. They should put the flame thrower on a tank! Terrans need another tank/armored vehicle; they already have 2 walkers.

 

I thought that the only valid complaint was picking units out of a crowd, other than that they were idiotic.

 

video is on point. very on point. mothership and thor have to go. they really are not for a serious RTS. we need to be more conservative about what we find acceptable as a unit in SC2.

 

The mothership already got a downgrade and is now nothing more than a semi-close range protoss guardian that is good vs. ground and the thor... well this one i do believe may need some revising as for now i just can't think of a good use for it as in many ways its only a bigger moderatly more powerfull tank.

Plus the videos comment on the blink ability is in some ways flawed as i see it being a very interesting ability and will be used with much creativity in sc2 but the video does raise a point about the stalkers form being similar to that wc3 unit and from what i've heard they even sound alike....

 

I enjoyed watching the video, but i disliked its bashing of stalkers, the Mothership, tanks, and buildings.  I also disliked how they failed to mention the banshee as one of the things blizz did right.

 

Yeah, that video is a compilation of opinions from one guy, some of them I agree with, some of them I dont. However he is right about the mothership. Since its meant to be a superweapon (Which I dont think fits on the game) I say its pointless either too keep it as deadly as in the first gameplay demo or to make it weaker (It would become pointless). I say remove it and place a new unit in its place...

About reapers, tanks looking like toys, etc.. they are just subjective opinions...

 

The video is pretty stupid in my opinion. He talks alot about units being not able to be recognizable and terran buildings are poorly done compared to SC1, but he's comparing video clips from SC1 to unbelievably blurry clips from SC2. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if those clips weren't even from SC2. They're in such bad quality, they could be from Age of Empires or something!

 

Honestly your argument was fine up until this part. Stick to facts. Don't stray into lunacy.

 

I should watch that. They better put the Reaver back in!

 

Geeze, I didn't mean to offend. I was just exaggerating to prove a point. It is obviously SC2 and not another RTS. I only chose Age of Empires because it was the only non-bizzard RTS I could think of at the time.

I want to see a poll of how many people want the Reaver back and how many want it gone. Just curiosity rearing it's ugly head...

 

If soul hunters are now changed into building killers then the name doesn't really suit it...