Official Q&A Compilation, WWI 2008

Discussion in 'WWI 2008' started by furrer, Jul 4, 2008.

Official Q&A Compilation, WWI 2008

Discussion in 'WWI 2008' started by furrer, Jul 4, 2008.

  1. furrer

    furrer New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    2,531
    Likes received:
    6
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Denmark
    Had to post a new one guys!
    These are the questions and answers from this topic:
    http://www.starcraft2forum.org/forums/showthread.php?t=5411 and no other
    This topic will be updated by me till the realease of Starcraft 2.
    The original questions and answers will not be edited in any way.
    PS: This should be made sticky. Im also please if you point out any grammar mistakes done by me, as Im not that good in english. It will take a while for me just to finish the questions made the last days.
     
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2008
  2. furrer

    furrer New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    2,531
    Likes received:
    6
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Denmark
    Questions and answers about Protoss:

    Jon: The Colossus might indeed be more balanced with an attack that simply does not waste damage, but for the cost I think it needs that "mass" destruction aspect that it has. I think the damage rate just needs to be reduced. Just one or two can completely turn the tide of a gigantic battle. It's almost unfair. But that's just a balance issue. :D The Colossus is a great unit and it has a new attack animation. The beam starts at one spot and sweeps either left or right. It's no longer a "fan" of lasers.
    Jon: To a degree, yes. I don't know if you guys are understanding the true SLOWNESS of the Mothership in this build, though. We're talking 10 minutes to cover a medium-sized map. Slower than a floating Command Center from SCBW. There are often four or five ways to counter a specific strategy rather than the one you usually have in StarCraft.
    Jon: Still needs AoE to justify it's cost. The old attack with a small AoE might work but it's so cool as is.
    Jon: 5x2 means two attacks for five damage. So 10 damage total per attack cycle. I'm not sure exactly how this works, but the Carrier is just expensive and lacks any real bite. It's HP has definitely taken a hit. Not to mention Interceptors are also 25 minerals apiece. Expensive. 400 gas? Sheesh.
    Jon: Damage sponge. It wasn't as overpowered in this build as it was last time. Before it could almost 3v1 Ultralisks, but now it's back to about 1.5v1.
     
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2008
  3. furrer

    furrer New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    2,531
    Likes received:
    6
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Denmark
    Question and answers about Terran:

    Jon:: The Marauder is entirely sufficient to help keep your Marines alive. The Terran can do completely without a Medic. If she's needed at all it would be in the later tiers when you can get the Medivac Dropship (which I still hate). I just wish the darn Marauder weren't so expensive.
    Jon: The Thor is a lost soul. I don't know where it fits and neither does Blizzard. The Viking, however, is useful, but is pretty expensive for being relatively weak. It's good to drop in and surprise units and is especially good against tanks, like you said. I prefer the Banshee 100 fold.
    Jon: I found the Reaper to be very useful against Light units. They absolutely own Marines pound for pound. They do the same to Zealots. Their mobility is also a huge advantage. Bringing the Medivac Dropship along just slows them down. They're fine on their own. Just run when there's a serious fight. I also liked to leave my mines behind and retreat slowly, thereby causing MASSIVE damage to any serious force pursuing me.
    Jon: Yes, but you will take massive losses with your Marines. The trade off is that you can produce so many Marines so quickly that it hardly even matters. I liked to intersperse some Marauders because of their higher hit points.
    Jon: Yes. I said somewhere in the article that beyond those early light units, though, the Jackal becomes useless. Remember how the Vulture was pretty much helpless against Dragoons? It's the same way with the Jackal and Stalker except amplified. The Jackal has only 90 HP and so is very susceptible to all attacks. Just two swipes from a Colossus will destroy an entire group at once. But it's very nice to deal a lot of splash damage to Zealots and Zerglings. It's also very effective against Roaches. I just wouldn't produce them en masse. That's why I don't understand why the Reactor for the Factory produces Jackals instead of Vikings like it used to. Maybe even allow it to produce two tanks?
    Jon: The Thor is definitely a tank. It also has a great GTA attack. That's why it's so confusing. You can either tank it (though it's pretty ineffective as an actual offensive unit GTG) or you can keep it home as a mobile and extremely effective GTA weapon. It's rebuild looks really dumb ATM but I can see some potential. I still think it should just lift off like a building and then it would be more unique. I even suggested to Samwise (Dustin wasn't around WTF?) that the Command Center have an upgrade to "Thor" and would thus emphasize it's "building" status. Right now it just has NO identity. It's not even built by an SCV.
    Jon: The Ghost is a very useful unit, though most definitely it's very tough to use. I simply don't have enough experience with the game (so neither does anyone else) to use it effectively. But it has huge potential. I mostly used it for its EMP ability against Protoss. It's devastating. Nukes are great. They have a bit smaller of a radius and since they're totally ineffective against Immortals it's difficult to use it effectively for its cost. But it's still an awesome weapon. Plus it looks schweet!

    As for the Nomad, they switched the model back to the original for WWI but told me that the new one is there but hasn't been perfected yet. I was a little mad about that. It was the first unit I looked for. But no ability changes there.


    Editors note: Blizzard said in an interview that they could not find a good solution for the Nomad, so they just kept the old Nomad.

    Jon: The Reactor needs some work. Not sure what needs to happen here. I would say that perhaps there needs to be a mineral cost associated with producing Marines at that speed. Maybe the Reactor just needs to be more expensive and build very quickly. Perhaps 200/200? It's just so easy to get now. Anyone can build 50 Marines in less than 4 minutes of game start.
    Jon: Unfortunately I didn't do the Terran stats. Nikzad did. I don't know, but it's not on the list he gave. I think the 8x8 attack is still there and it definitely switches to the next target in the middle of a burst. I think it just needs to be more expensive. The unit is great because it can contribute significantly to Terran forces just by itself, but a player should not be capable of massing it like I saw done. For sure, Terran air is the most powerful ATM. By a long shot. Remember that video where a Battlecruiser took on two Carriers with ease? That's about where we stand.
    Jon: Barracks = Marine, Factory = Jackal, Starport =Viking
    Jon: Any infantry unit can sit in the Bunker and can use all of their abilities. Marine, Marauder, Ghost, etc
    Jon: I used it a couple of times. Mostly I would raid and enemy mineral line and do a lot of damage and then as any serious response came up (anything more than just Marines because Reapers can easily handle Marines almost 2 to 1) I would lay mines and retreat slowly. This would force the other player to continue firing at my Reapers instead of the mines and would do decimating damage to the units pursuing my Reapers. They're pretty effective.
     
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2008
  4. furrer

    furrer New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    2,531
    Likes received:
    6
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Denmark
    Questions and answers about Zerg:

    Jon: 75 minerals, 25 gas (Same as past Hydralisk)
    Jon: Lurkers are definitely weaker against Marines. They're better for taking out large groups of Vikings and Jackals or Stalkers, but overall I found them pretty useless relative to their cost. I only tried to use them once and learned my lesson quickly.
    Jon: According to my notes the Marauder has +14 damage to Armored units. I said 20 in the article only because I was emphasizing the point.
    Jon: No, just certain units. I'm disappointed with the Hydralisk and Lurker, but that's just a cost issue. I think it is easily corrected. The problem is balancing its use while keeping it separate from the Roach.
    Jon: I tended to be more reliant upon the Roach and Mutalisk. The Corruptor is relatively cheap and since it can be built directly from the Lair tech without a Spire it can respond quickly to air threats. It's just not effective against Capital Ships in ANY way. I didn't find the absence of the Hydralisk to be particularly worrisome. It's just difficult when you need a strong ranged unit. I utilized mostly Banelings and Zerglings but it is difficult, I assure you.
    Jon: And the Nydus Worm requires Creep and is a building. You have to be able to see the area you're creating it at. It's exactly like the old Nydus Canal ATM. It's pretty nerfed and dumb. But that is a VERY recent change as all the build devs still thought it was a unit! :D It's still very powerful but nowhere near as cool.
    Jon: It was pretty slow. I think it needs a bigger attack. And when it infests units they should start shooting back to help turn the tide. Currently the shooting back feature is gone. I think it should be very similar to the Devourer. Lots of armor, lots of HP, and it's attack should bring Capital Ships to their knees.
    Jon: Yes, they're far less mobile. Now they're just an annoyance. Especially with even one Thor hanging around. The dev team has assured me numerous times that they WILL make the Mutalisk stack.
    Jon: I think it's fine. Not a hindrance at all. The Devs just need to be careful that they don't put too much of a burden on the Zerg to sacrifice Drones while the Protoss and Terran are chugging away. But I do think it's a good idea to move away from the Queen because she allowed for mass defensive structures.
    Jon: Don't worry. I didn't have any problem with this. They're pretty slow overall and they lose ALL their armor when they uproot as well as a large chunk of HP. They're so easy to kill when uprooted (and can't attack) that I routinely ignored units to kill them if someone uprooted one (because they're slow to build and cost the player 150 minerals). That's how quickly they died when uprooted. The problem I described had to do with a player's inability to get a head start in building their Spine Crawlers by building a Creep Colony.
    Jon: I like the Roach. I just don't like that it has sent the Hydralisk packing. They need to find a way to work the Hydralisk back in to a prominent position. I keep thinking the Roach should be a mutation of the Hydralisk (like the Lurker) or vice versa (Hydralisk from Roach).
    Jon: Not many changes to them except that the Ultralisk does +40 damage to buildings or something ridiculous like that. Ultralisks absolutely tear through buildings. I was talking with some other site admins about a fully upgraded Ultralisk which would theoretically do something like 115 damage to a structure.

    The Infestor apparently has a model change in the works, but no other changes to note other than that.
     
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2008
  5. furrer

    furrer New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    2,531
    Likes received:
    6
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Denmark
    Questions and answers about the gameplay:

    Jon: Most units were useful. I think some were a little overpriced and a bit too weak like the Hydralisk and Lurker. For their cost there are just better options.
    Jon: The two gases were really there to counterbalance the fact that a lot more buildings require gas. The whole new gas system is really there to give the whole game a little more macromanagement requirements. But yes, you can tech much more quickly but you will also mine less. It's the same trade off as in the original.
    Jon: The number of minerals you had was always an increment of five, so it was a little easier to spend. But I don't think it really changed the gameplay at all. I don't think it's better or worse. I think if you had the whole 8 that it used to be the gameplay might be a little TOO fast, but I'm unconvinced. I don't think there's a real reason.
    Jon: I think it's annoying, but I do think it brings a little more macromanagement in. If that's what's necessary... I don't think it will be in the final build. They'll find something more interesting. I had heard a similar idea to it from the design team. They said originally that they had an ability which costs 100 minerals that instead of regaining operation of your extractor you would be able to mine with six workers from it for a short period of time.

    But the good thing about the way it is now is that your gas never permanently depletes. That means you can continue to use higher tiered units later in the game and the chances of running out of resources altogether is much lower.

    Jon: You can still see bonuses and attacks.
    Jon: Not sure, but I would venture to guess that it divides it up.
    Jon: The Terran need something that puts them more in line with their race identity. Then balance, balance, balance. But the game overall is very fun and exciting.

    Other questions and answers:

    Jon: I had a good time but it was pretty difficult to get around and get things done. Also lost my camera :-\.
     
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2008