GroundCraft 2

[sandwich_bird]

Something that I always hated about Starcraft is the fact that most air units suck and are never used except to support your army or to harass. Rarely did I ever saw someone make a powerful air fleet in 1v1 (with the exception of mutas of course). If you're Terran why build wraiths when you can build tanks + gols? If you're Protoss, well who really use the scout often anways? AtA only ships are not useful because really no one use air fleets (again, except against zerg). As for capital ships, you usually don't have the funds or the time to mass them. Really, I don't think it make much sens that the race with the strongest air fleet is the zerg. Mutas are quick and powerful and if you dare to build an air fleet against the zerg, they can easily mass produce scourges.

With units following the same tendencies in Starcraft II, there's a high probability that the air units will also be useless.

What do you think? Should we have more powerful air units?

[Kimera757]

Same tendencies? I don't think it's a good idea to use such broad brush statements.

For terrans there's the banshee. It does 24 damage a pop. A group of three can be ordered to serially kill every worker in a base (obviously you'd use more to avoid losses). That's three times the damage of a Wraith (assuming same RoF). I don't see this fitting the same tendency.

There's also the viking, but it's role is a little unclear given that reapers can kill workers much better than it can.

For protoss there's the void ray. A small group can carve buildings up quickly, even town centers. Destroying a command center will disrupt your opponent's economy just like killing their workers would. They're also powerful enough to destroy anti-air towers, something wraiths and scouts horribly sucked at.

There's also the phoenix, which is only really useful against ... oh who am I kidding, it sucks. It can't do splash anymore, it can't attack buildings, it's more of a spellcaster when it attacks ground units (it's inefficient vs workers, it can't lift heavy targets, you only use it to take out certain high value targets like enemy high templar and you can only lift one target at a time with it).

For zerg, there's the mutalisk. It's been indirectly nerfed (light armor doesn't give the same benefits since both phoenixes and vikings do decent damage to it) and the brood lord, which will be more expensive than the swarm guardian, has more hit points but doesn't deal more damage, plus it's higher tier than the banshee.

Corruptors meanwhile got beefed. They're cheaper than mutalisks, they do good damage vs armored units and now their turrets can target ground. On the downside corruptors cannot target ground themselves (which means if your enemy has no air units, you can't make turrets to attack their buildings) and the turrets only deal 6 or 7 damage, which is pretty lame against the very capital ships corruptors seem designed to fight.

I left capital ships to the end. I can't find a good set of stats on carriers (how do you compare its cooldown to that of the StarCraft I carrier) but the battlecruiser does more than double the damage of the SC I version and Missile Swarm can be used to take out dangerous opponents like corruptors and vikings. I suspect you'll need smaller, more affordable groups of them.

Also, the raven/nighthawk has defense pods which basically do the same thing as the predator did -- shut down certain enemy attackers, such as missile turrets. This is awesome support for any terran AtG attackers - namely banshees as well as battlecruisers. I think terrans are real winners in the AtG battles

[TheEconomist]

You have a few valid points and some that are pretty far off.

Still, I agree. I hope air units are more effective this time around.

[sandwich_bird]

That's true for the banshee. There's certainly more opportunity to build them than the wraiths.

I'm not convinced for the void ray though. Apparently they only deal 6 damage (from sc2armory). Does the dps really compensate?

[TheEconomist]

The damage increases the longer it attacks the same target.

[Eligor]

Wasn't one of the main development goals in SC 2 to make air units more viable and effective? It does seem to me that in SC 2 the best way to counter air is with air units of your own, at least in theory.

[TheEconomist]

Let's hope it ends up that way

[SpiderBrigade]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure they made the changes they did exactly to address this.

Zerg still have their Mutalisk awesomeness, and they get the Corrupter to give them strong antiair without being as dominating as Scourge were. Plus guardians make a comeback which were another commonly-seen air unit.

In SC/BW Terran air had a few problems. Wraith cloaking was cool but they absolutely sucked against ground. Valkyries were strong against air but much too special-purpose unless the other guy went for mass light air. In SC2, they swapped the Wraith out for the Banshee, which is antiground but keeps the useful cloak. The Viking is strong against heavy air but has more versatility due to transform. And of course BCs are back too.

Protoss have the Phoenix which is sort of like a Corsair (probably their most-used air unit in SC/BW) but with an ability that will let them hit ground if you micro a lot. But the main purpose of the Phoenix is to protect your big ships - Void Ray will absolutely destroy buildings but is vulnerable against light air.

[RainbowToeSocks]

Didn't someone from blizzard say they were aiming to make air have more playtime in SCII? I do believe so. With all the air units being a lot more effective against ground (banshee, nighthawk, carrier, etc..) It will force players to go air to fight back or have a possibility of being overrun with air.

[TheEconomist]

A lot of people seem to remember Blizzard saying they wanted to address this issue. I hope they are taking this into consideration.

Does anyone remember where this was said?