Re: Dark shrine seems to be a very boring building
Quote:
it’s been said DTs are pretty useless in SC2
A lot of things have "been said" about units in SC2. And SC1 for that matter. A lot of wrong things. Hell, just look at imba.Adolf; on Day 1 he was not impressed with the Hellion, and on Day 2 he was just fine with it.
Re: Dark shrine seems to be a very boring building
Re: Dark shrine seems to be a very boring building
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Wankey
Because those are natural expansions to the tech tree. This is a leaf on the end of the tech tree that doesn’t offer much in terms of reward (yeah yeah dark templar, it’s been said DTs are pretty useless in SC2)
I'm sure they're no less useful than they were in the original StarCraft.
Re: Dark shrine seems to be a very boring building
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Wankey
Yeah... just do it!
I mean, put them back into Templar archives and use the model for the Dark Obelisk, everyone is used to "Templar archives=DT&HT"
Re: Dark shrine seems to be a very boring building
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Josue
Yeah... just do it!
I mean, put them back into Templar archives and use the model for the Dark Obelisk, everyone is used to "Templar archives=DT&HT"
So what if they're used to it? It's poor game design to have two such different and powerful units come from the exact same tech.
Re: Dark shrine seems to be a very boring building
Quote:
Originally Posted by
screw_ball69
Warhammer 40k
Nay, Starship Troopers.
Re: Dark shrine seems to be a very boring building
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Quirel
Nay, Starship Troopers.
Good to know at least someone knows their history.
Re: Dark shrine seems to be a very boring building
I saw all 3 movies, but I'm sad people lost interest around them. The third one looked horrible.
Re: Dark shrine seems to be a very boring building
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The_Blade
I saw all 3 movies, but I'm sad people lost interest around them. The third one looked horrible.
I think he's talking about the novel (ie, 1959), not the movie (1997-8).