Protoss airforce disappointing, artwise and gameplay wise

[scorpio19]

new disappointing immortal...

watch video 4:25---5:15 immortal is not walk..

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/mu...craft-ii/52100

I think have skates or wheels

[Wankey]

new disappointing immortal...

watch video 4:25---5:15 immortal is not walk..

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/mu...craft-ii/52100

I think have skates or wheels

That's obviously a bug. I assume they are trying to fix the model stuttering issue they found in the third battle report (notice the top of the immortal is super smooth in this video now)

[Wankey]

Looks like the Protoss Airforce is here to stay. Carrier has remained unchanged

[supersonic]

Looks like the Protoss Airforce is here to stay. Carrier has remained unchanged

Having played the new Protoss Air force that apparently sucks so terribly, I think it is the most improved with 2nd being Terran. The Void Ray is a great new unit that is probably my favorite unit so far, art and all, because of its danger when it builds up its beams. Carrier has been given all new life and feels almost like a whole new unit with its "interceptor speed" upgrade. And the Phoenix, although it can only attack air, its ability is very useful for picking off the odd ground unit. Seeing as they are AtA but can attack ground temporarily when needed, I think this makes the Protoss Air force very unique and gives it a very new feel.

I also believe it is VERY naive to say that think the Protoss Air force is disappointing in game play when you frankly have not even played the game. There were a lot of things I didn't like and did like only to find my opinions switching once you actually get down and play the game and use the units in the heat of battle and see really how they are going to be used.

Discussing is fine but saying that you feel it's disappointing (no matter how many times you've watched the battle reports) is groundless because you really don't know anything, that goes for units, macro, micro, and anything else that feels different when playing the game. What looks worse on paper might actually be very good in game in practical uses.

[Jabber Wookie]

This of course leads to more match being held between ground forces instead of air.

I've heard many complaints about Starcraft consisting of too many ground-oriented battles; however, I don't understand why this is a bad thing.
If Blizzard made the game so that air units were just as easily produced and as effective at early stages as ground units then WHO WOULDN'T GO AIR EVERY TIME!?!? Air units defy all ground constraints and can move anywhere on the map without overcoming obstacles, so why would the game be fun if you were only battling with other players in the air? That would defeat the purpose of all the well-placed terrain obstacles and map layouts that provide much more tactical and strategic gameplay, which makes the game far more fun, and provides a purpose for more than one map.

I think air units should remain as support/harrass units, at least until the late late game, or unless massing them requires a really risky build order, which makes the player vulnerable during the early game. For instance, Nicol's 4-Port Banshee suggestion sounds like a reasonable incorporation of mass air units.

Otherwise, I welcome Groundcraft with support/harrass and late game mass AirCraft

[flabortast]

You can't have too powerful GtA units or else air units will not be used entirely or will become an afterthought. People won't just mass air units all the time when alot of them are AtA and need to use a special ability or land to fight ground.

[pure.Wasted]

I've heard many complaints about Starcraft consisting of too many ground-oriented battles; however, I don't understand why this is a bad thing.
If Blizzard made the game so that air units were just as easily produced and as effective at early stages as ground units then WHO WOULDN'T GO AIR EVERY TIME!?!? Air units defy all ground constraints and can move anywhere on the map without overcoming obstacles, so why would the game be fun if you were only battling with other players in the air? That would defeat the purpose of all the well-placed terrain obstacles and map layouts that provide much more tactical and strategic gameplay, which makes the game far more fun, and provides a purpose for more than one map.

As my very lengthy analysis of terrain in SC2, and what Blizzard can do with it, suggested way back on BF... there is absolutely no reason why "air" has to be as simple as it is now.

If Blizzard wished it, they could add depth to air movement and air combat the same way it exists now for ground units.

[Aldrius]

Yeah, point is. Wraith and Scout weren't very good. Especially compared to the Mutalisk. And the Mutalisk is actually a really good example.

Mutalisk is good. It serves a purpose, it moves fast, attacks fast, but it's use as a combat unit is limited versus an army (unless you outmaneuver them). So are you going to use it over Lurkers/Hydralisks/Zerglings in every situation? No way.

Same SHOULD apply to Scout, but it doesn't. There is no instance where a Scout is more useful than a Dragoon. And except for cloak, the same goes for the Wraith with the Goliath.

That's what Blizzard needs (and hopefully has) fixed. Hopefully Banshees and Void Rays will make up for where Blizzard went wrong with the Wraith and Scout.

[MattII]

Well it depends on the enemy really, after all, a Wraith or Scout can chase an Overlord in areas a Goliath or Dragoon can't, especially with the pathing in SC, and both can hit back at a Carrier or Guardian at max range as well.

[The_Blade]

It will get polished... I dont think Blizz will let this through...

Besides we all know that the main protoss power has always been ground... Mass carriors where only used in few situations