StarCraft II Q&A - Batch 20

[img width=630 height=137]http://www.starcraft2forums.org/img/qa1.jpg[/img]​

Wow, we're already at our 20th Batch of Community Q&As! I've got to say, the questions from the community are becoming better and better as we move along. Nonetheless, I want to remind everyone to ask your StarCraft II questions on this thread:
http://www.battle.net/forums/thread.aspx?fn=sc2-general&t=9620&p=1&#post9620

The Devs and I are all reading and we love answering community questions. Every week there are always exciting new changes we want to share with everyone. Granted, many of the changes may not stay in the game very long, but the process of game development is a constant cycle of brainstorm, revision, and much testing, to ultimately make all the gaming components flow together for one awesome overall experience.

Chat with Devs: Terran Ghosts are currently being tested as an effective Tier 1.5 unit, capable of sniping down high profile enemy targets, have an increased attack damage towards light armored units, as well as an upgradable EMP against Protoss and energy using threats. If that isnt enough, these highly advanced Terran soldiers at higher techs can also be equipped with a personal cloak ability, and launch drop pod reinforcements, as well as call down a massive nuclear strike. The StarCraft II Ghost will surely be bringing a whole new meaning to "You call down the thunder and I'll reap the whirlwind." Of course, I should mention, all of this is subject to change.

As always, feel free to give the Devs and I a w00t if your enjoying these Q&As!

---StarCraft II Q&A - Batch 20---

1. Will it be possible to give more fluid and realistic movements to small aircraft with proper banking and turning rather than just abrupt sprite-style direction changes?

We are currently in the process of implementing banking animations for flying units, but playability always comes first. If the animations affect playability negatively, it could get cut.

2. With the Reavers no longer in the game, will the Protoss have any units capable of performing brutal worker raids? (Starcraftlive.net)

The Colossus is an excellent choice for worker raids, since it is able to attack from higher elevations, and can be transported by the Phase Prism. In addition, we are exploring some ideas for the Twilight Archon that would allow him to make devastating attacks on enemy workers.

3. Will there be a escort ship for Battlecrusier because Protoss have like many kinds of capital ships?

With the Predator unit cut, the Viking is now the primary Terran air to air fighter. In addition, the Viking no longer requires an upgrade to transform between a ground and air unit and is also built directly from the Starport rather than the Factory.

4. Will there be units who can trample opponents (such as an Ultralisk)? (gamereplays.org)

Currently, there are no units that trample, but have discussed this idea as a possibility. Nonetheless, we also hit the dilemma of having a trample unit that is able to destroy enemy unit assets far beyond its own cost of the trample unit, with relatively little micro.

5. Will siege tanks be able to shoot at targets in the fog of war picked up by sensor towers, but not yet confirmed by visual sighting?

No. Siege Tanks will only be able to hit targets within visual range. In addition, Siege Tanks firing from the fog of war, such as on an unseen cliff, will not reveal its location from the fog of war to its enemy, thus will not be able to be return fired upon.


Bonus 800 minerals for a New Thread of Extreme Interest

 

I made it so it could be displayed on the front page.

 

Bummer, I was looking forward to seeing the Predator in action....

Although I am really really looking forward to playing with the new Ghosts they are going to be awesome. And the Twilight Archon.

The last question though I think we all knew.

 

For the answer to 1, a flying unit in space wouldn't bank. An airplane banks because banking causes the lift forces to be directed at an angle causing the craft to turn. I say just stick with the plane non banking animation.

As for number three, this makes me dissatisfied with the Terran fleet. If you scrap the predator fine, but don't make the Viking its replacement. There is such a thing as a unit having too many roles. Before, I thought the Predator and Viking mix to handle AA was excellent. The Predator would be better against the lighter air units and could use intercept mode to fill a supporting role, while the Viking would be useful in taking on capital ships, just like the Wraith was. Now, the Viking fills the role of all around AA unit and it fills the role of base raider and ground support unit.

 

wow wtf...

It isn't my type to make something out of this, but

Isn't it only fair that the minerals be split up or something, I mean, I was the one that brought that here.

 

Well that makes no sense.....A fighter isn't going to completely halt its momentum just to turn. It's gonna swerve cause that's how a pilot steers.


Anyway....I never really liked the Predator, it seemed to gimmicky. However, I do agree with Quanta....The Viking is going to supposed to fill too many roles, and because of that, it's going to suck every one.

 

Sorry Z-Boson.

I believe I have mentioned this before, but you probably missed it.
If you want to be rewarded to have your post on the news section, you have to fine tune all the details and add pictures to it. Copying and pasting won't get you rewarded.

 

Actually in space to do a 90 degree turn you have to halt all of your forward momentum.  You can do that while accellerating in the direction you want to go, resulting in a wide arching turn, but there still would be no banking; Newton's second law is a bitch.  Although, if it bothers people too much go ahead and have banking.  It wouldn't be the least realistic thing in the game; I think, psionics takes the cake for that.  However, it is still incorrect to have banking in space.

Watch the new battlestar galactica they do a pritty good job of demostrating how a ship would actually fly in space.

 

Well, if you're going for realism.....They would bank. A pilot would obviously be trained on a planet, and there's banking. If he was then moved to spacecraft, they would have to rig it so it would bank on turns, otherwise the pilot would be disoriented.

I realize though, that true nul-G dogfighting would be rather linear.

 

Sure, no problem...

I don't really care much about getting rewarded or not but I do care for the fact that I brought this information here and then someone just makes it prettier and gets the credit.

Just gives me the message that either post it pretty or don't post at all. Since I personally don't think it is worth it to spend time refining it just for minerals, I will take the latter.

My choice though, I fully understand why that rule exists. Thanks for the heads up.

 

The only way to get a ship in space to bank would be to fire thrusters to cause the craft to rotate, and then fire a thruser in the oposite direction to stop it rotationg. You would actually have to artificially simulate banking.

Why would they go through all that trouble when they could just rain the pilot in space or make him learn how to fly in space. One of today's fighter pilots would probably get disoriented if you put them in space but they would eventually get the hang of the different physics. I'd give you the example of shuttules which don't bank, but they don't exactly do radical maneuvering.

Of course it would even be better if you just trained the pilot in space in the first place. I do not see why it is obvious that a pilot would be trained on a planet. In may ways, learning to fly on a planet is much more dangerous than learning to fly in space since on a planet, if something goes wrong you crash, in space you just drift, assuming you aren't any where near a large mass or an astroid field, then you would be in trouble.

 

excellent bit about the siege tank not revealing its position when firing, not sure about the part with cutting out the predator though

 

Interesting things about the ghost, they are trying to make it an actual fighting unit, which I like. Making the viking from the Starport seems kind of weird. It seems that there won't be any units that will be able to come out of a plain factory if the cobra still requires the armory. I really wish they would have told us why they cut the predator, I thought it sounded like a pretty sweet unit.

 

as for the hidden units, usualy it will still be pretty obvious where they are hiding, i mean there is only so many cliffs.

i find the info on the viking the most interesting, makes it seem much more usefull imho

 

I don't understand the move of the Viking to the Starport.

That really takes away its "ground support" role. Now I expect Terran will have to be reliant on the slow-ass Cobra for that?

 

There is a blizzard dev someplace that needs to be hit over the head repeatedly.

 

Viking --->starport is a bad move- Pun intended.

The viking isn't a support fighter (in the air at least), it has a specific role: to take out capital ships. The terrans already failed once with the Valkyrie, and it looks like they're on the road to failure again.

 

yeah ure right. Pretator does sound and looked pretty sexy imo.....maybe they gna make a new unit?? cuz i dont like it when a unit has way 2 many roles.

maybe they will make the normad look like the pretator now!! then we will all like the normad!! =D

 

See folks we have no further need for the reaver.

PS LT you are no longer allowed to post FAQs or unit updates for a month.  It is time to give others a chance to earn some money.

 

wow i missed a lot of stuff.... when did the predator get cut?
It was such a good idea.... T.T why Blizzard why explain more....
And i can only go wtf at the viking being moved to the Starport.... who made that decision in Blizzard... cause thats the most stupid thing i have seen all day.
So whats coming out of the factory without any additional buildings? Whats gonna be the unit which the reactor addon allows to build two at a time?