Talk:StarCraft II

Comment 1
WOW. This may finally be the reawakening of the Starcraft franchise. I was very afraid they would never make this game. -- ED ( talk )(shockfront) 19:02, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah its really cool --Gurluas 19:50, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be a real purpose on adding statistics to units until the game is released (they've said that they are game balancing right now, so it's very likely that all that info will change anyway).

Perhaps it would be a good idea to add a couple of sub-headings for "Retired Units" (examples: Dragoons are confirmed as retired, and probably Shuttles, because who needs Shuttles when you can bend space and time?) and "Speculation" (the marine models are shown wielding bayonets and holding riot shields; this might represent either a cosmetic change or an in-game upgrade). Close analysis of Blizzard's official releases reveals a number of things; the Art Trailer reveals the presence of something resembling High Templar that is capable of utilizing what appeared to be Psionic Storm on a swarm of Zerglings. The same trailer also seemed to suggest that Missile Turrets could target ground units; at the very least, they were confirmed able to target Colossi.

Speculation: The role of Protoss Corsairs might be filled by the combination of Phoenix (light anti-air) and Warp Ray (anti-structure). Though the lack of Disruption Web could be painful, it's certainly not debilitating.

Speculation: Units like the Phoenix and Colossus might very well do Starcraft II's equivalent of Concussive Damage: great against small targets, worthless against large targets.

How the fuck do you guys know gaurdins are still in the game Agentheartlesspain 23:25, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't know. Unlike StarCraft, StarCraft II is new, so everything should be sourced. I'll leave it up for a day or two, then remove it if no one can link it to a source. PsiSeveredHead 01:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

builing section

yea there needs well propably should be a building section will pictures also you can same thing with units Agentheartlesspain 22:47, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Comment 2
http://limitedgaming.com/files/18/protoss_tech.JPG

http://limitedgaming.com/files/18/terran_tech.JPG

The articles and templates need to be updated now.-ThickTerranArmor 21:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I think the description of the Phoenix should be updated
more possible Speculation: The Phoenix is most likely a replacement for the Scout, as it's abilities seem closer to that, than a Corsair; ie. separate attacks versus ground/air. Balzi 00:35, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Not according to the air-balance model from Brood War. Scouts are good at killing big, heavily armored spacecraft (eg battlecruisers, Carriers) while Corsairs are good at killing the small fighters. The Warp Ray replaces the Scout, the Phoenix replaces the Corsair (in the model, at least). The model could have changed, though. PsiSeveredHead 11:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

hmmm ok. I spose that sounds fair. but the page has been updated now anyway. The 'apparent replacement' bits seem better worked out. good work Balzi 01:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Some cool new ideas
A new idea i thought of is having more than one SCV build a structure. It would make it go faster plus diverse the terran building process further from the other races.

Also, NO MAP MAX PLZ!!!!!!

Fact is, if Blizzard doesn't put out any such maps, people will make some. PsiSeveredHead 22:44, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Scumedit?
Is Blizzard really making a world editor called Scum Edit? Or is this just vandalism?

24.124.49.158 22:19, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

That's the real name. StarCraft I maps are called "StarCraft Map" or "SCM" or "Scum". PsiSeveredHead 22:29, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

New Protoss Units
A new video has surfaced on youtube  showing footage of four new units. Soul Hunter - a hovering unit that shoots beams of energy. Phase Cannon - the new photon cannon, can move from place to place. Twilight Archon - archon, I'm assuming from 1 high templar and 1 dark templar. Tempest - Ship, with powerful shields and an interceptor-like attack.


 * I'm wondering if the Phase Cannon replaces the Photon Cannon, or is simply an enhanced version of it ... that is, are Photon Cannons still in the game as well? The first official Gameplay video (which gave us the first rundown of Protoss units) used the term "Photon Cannon" to refer to the base defenses (the ones the Reapers disabled temporarily by taking out the Pylon before the Phase Prisms deployed to re-power them).  --Chibiabos 03:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * There has now also been a leakage of scans from a new PC gamer issue at . This confirms the reaver, the dark templar, and the observer, and introduces the star relic, bringing the grand total of protoss units to 17, more than in brood war.  Interestingly, the probe is not mentioned in the scans.

PC Gamer demo video
I propose removing this section, as its information is now redundant.

While the article will still be a bit large, it will free up some space. I will make no action to do this until there is a consensus, but I do have an idea for a new section (yeah, I know, just what it needs to get even larger). --Chibiabos 03:28, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

How do you edit this page?
I have some more information that should be added to this page. How do i edit it, or how do i send my info to the person who is updating it.

The information is that the Colossus unit can be attacked by both ground and air attack units due to its height. Reference: http://www.starcraft2.com/screenshot.xml?10.


 * It was already noted in the Colossus-specific article, but thank you. It takes awhile to get used to editing wiki articles, but if you make a big booboo doing so, don't fret ... someone can fix it.  To edit an article you are viewing, simply click on the "edit" tab near the top of the page ... if you are in the "article" tab and click on the "edit" tab, you will edit the article; if you are on the "discussion" tab and click on "edit," you will edit the "discussion" tab (often referred to as the "talk page").  --Chibiabos 04:31, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Some articles, like StarCraft II, require you to sign up in order to edit them, and even then it may take up to four days before "edit privileges" come through. PsiSeveredHead 11:33, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Is there a reason that the Terran and zerg sections of this article have seemingly been cut out, or at least not showing what's displayed when one goes to edit it? --Hawki 01:33, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

There was a referencing error in the Terran section (now fixed). I didn't see anything different about the Zerg section, though. Could you post an example? PsiSeveredHead 02:39, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

The error was probably due to the Terran section alone, given that the zerg section is now showing completely, along with the rest of the Terran section. --Hawki 04:06, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

High templar abilities
Hi, i'm some random dude from australia who watched that recent video posted up on youtube, your info about the tempest not having shields may be wrong, as the tempest that "exploded" exploded in a puff that was arather similar to a hallucination being destroyed from the original game, also the tempest appeared a more blue tint. Just wanted to let you guys know, i'm too lazy to start my own account

heers, from a random aussie dude

It would be pretty weird, I think, for the video to showcase hallucinated Tempests. In any event, nothing in StarCraft II is confirmed. If this were wikipedia, there would be a template saying "this is an unreleased video game". PsiSeveredHead 00:02, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I say leave the speculation out, and wait for them to confirm or disconfirm it. -- ED ( talk )(gaming) 23:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Clarification
Can someone clarify 2 things for me please: 1. "In the beginning of the video, what appears to be a new Terran structure can be seen mining minerals with a laser-like beam and extracting them without the involvement of SCV's or similar mining units." - I watched the video a few times and couldn't fund this structure. Can someone verify this. 2. Is there any news of a released demo for this game or is that just empty rumors? Thanks


 * I've seen it, its during the very initial fly-in, as the Phoenix and Phase Prisms start the video-demo mission. A lot of folk ... though hard to say if its a majority ... believe it must be doodads.


 * As for the playable demo, I was highly skeptical ... but as it turns out, it is true! There will be a publicly available demo of multiplayer StarCraft II at Blizzcon ... the news announcement is on Blizzard's main site, http://www.blizzard.com.  I added this info to the article.  --Chibiabos 02:57, 22 June 2007 (UTC

To answer your 1st Q: At the beginning of the 21 minute video, you see the pheanix and some phase prisms flying in as the above person said, below them there is a cliff with some minerals on it, a machine shoots a red laser at the minerals, as if its mining them. You must look quickly!

I added a much better picture of it. PsiSeveredHead 22:44, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Reapers in PC Gamer
If you look closely at the PC Gamer video the reapers use flamethrowers, they can be seen during the phase cannon part and the soul hunter part.

I am not sure if this is official but go check it out

"Buzzers" Have real name
In the recent E3 video, the tempest's "interceptors" were distinctly called "shurikens." They also revealed that tempests can attack air and ground, but only have shields towards ground-based foes; twilight archons come from 2 ht, 2 dt, or 1 ht and 1 dt; also supply depots, ghosts, medics, and barracks and factory add-ons are confirmed.


 * I've linked the stuff from the print article. If you give me a link to the video I can also confirm that information as well. PsiSeveredHead 23:56, 12 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Question about the tempest: Is its belly shield, if you will, inpenetrable or just tough like the immortal's shield in the protoss demo?

I don't believe it has ever been explicitly stated, but if they were immune to ground attacks they would be pretty broken. I'm pretty sure they're just extra-tough against ground. (The shields were described as "tough" by Browder in one of those interview videos.) PsiSeveredHead 22:44, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

It doesnt really matter now. The Tempest has been removed now that the Carrier has been brought back. Klias

Unannounced Terrain unit? Also add-ons for Terrains changed or interchangable?
If you look closely at the picture in the link below, you'll notice a few mystery units defending the the bunkers from Soul Hunters. Are these Vultures or a new unit? UPDATE(from the article portion), the unit is called the Cobra.

http://www.infoceptor.com/wow/gallery/album35/screen8

Also compare the links below, you'll notice the one released earlier by Blizzard (massive Zergling attack on Terrains) has an add-on attached to the Barracks(which by itself is no cause for question).

http://www.infoceptor.com/wow/gallery/album35/939643_20070519_screen017

But in a picture(the link below) recently released by Blizzard the add-on on that Building(the Barracks) went to the Factory building, and the Barracks has a new add-on attached.

http://www.infoceptor.com/wow/gallery/album35/screen4

So did, for some reason, Blizzard decide to switch the add-on or have they become interchangable?Tricker37


 * I've found interpreting images to be kind of risky. But to try to answer the questions:


 * 1) I don't know if that's a new unit. You're not the only person to see it. It could be a Viking.


 * 2) The first add-on was near (behind) a Barracks but might not have actually been a Barracks add-on. PsiSeveredHead 01:16, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Seriously, do you see a factory anywhere nearby that barracks? Please compare the pictures a little more closely.


 * I am pretty sure everyone knows the answer by now :) Addictgamer 16:12, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

According to the various previews, each add-on can be added to nearly any building.

Anyone want to do the German articles? I'm like to wait until the 25th before putting the information up, but people probably want the information right away. PsiSeveredHead 00:03, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Gold Minerals: In one of those screenshots i noticed the SCVs weremining the gold minerals, this will be a cool new concept to the game if it is true.
 * We know, it's been (still is) in this article for some time with a picture. Addictgamer 21:31, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Can anyone tell me which is the reactor and which is the tech center? 1 2 DivineBaboon 16:36, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

The second one is the Tech Lab. I should upload those pictures. PsiSeveredHead 01:07, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Terran Bar? Machine Gun Turret?
see here DivineBaboon 16:34, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Definitely Machine Gun Turret against ground units. The bar I guess is either to upgrade infantry or maybe it's sort of like a new medic? Addictgamer 12:49, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

terran tech tree Bar is called Merc Haven,let's you build ghosts in the barracks. DivineBaboon 03:32, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Possible Reaper Mine?
small pic large pic I think it's the Reaper Mine with a countdown circle around it...thoughts? DivineBaboon 18:41, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * With all those reapers there I guess so - nothing else comes to mind. Addictgamer 12:49, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Tempest Removed, Carrier come back
Tempest was removed, Carrier comes back again

Here the Info:

Starcraft 2 First Impressions at ScLegacy.com

http://www.sclegacy.com/editorials/sciiproto.php

ScLegacy 08/03/07 12:56 pm CMT

Terran and Protoss Tech Tree screenshot.
terran protoss

The Reaver is not shown on the Protoss tech tree, and apparently someone wrote in an article that a Blizzard rep has confirmed that they had taken the Reaver out of the game very recently. Should it be moved to the non-returning units list?

Mothership
A recent edit removed the note about only 1 mothership allowed at a time for a Protoss player. Was this aspect removed? Is there a source for it? I'm just curious about the development of the game

Gaming at Blizzcon showed that more than one Mothership could be controlled at a time.--Hawki 08:27, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Terran Campaign
The current section reads:

In the Terran campaign, players will be able to choose their own missions in the middle part of the campaign rather than progress through a set series. Interactions in briefings will also change, as Jim Raynor can interact with those around him (eg he can walk around the Hyperion). Also, (access to) units and upgrades for them are purchased outside actual missions, at least in the Terran Campaign. This is evidenced here

I'd like to propose:

The Terran Single Player Campaign now follows a non-linear storyline. Instead of being assigned missions in a pre-defined order, and unlocking new levels of the tech tree as you progress, the player can choose which missions to attempt. Successful completion of the mission objectives provides the player with credits, which can then be used to purchase (unlock) new units, buildings, add-ons and upgrades to be used in subsequent missions. The interior of the battlecruiser Hyperion replaces the briefing rooms, and the player can direct Jim Raynor to talk to crew members (through a choice of phrases) and interact with areas of the ship. This 'between mission' space is also used to introduce side plots and provide additional information about the StarCraft universe. Although more open ended, the player will still reach a defined end point. The details for the other races have not yet been revealed.

I like this better, but I think you should mention that only the middle part of the campaign can be altered. (This was from the video.) PsiSeveredHead 23:03, 7 August 2007 (UTC)


 * We also don't know what degree of non-linearity is present. It could simply be a bunch of optional missions in addition to the main ones. - Dark T Zeratul 02:49, 8 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree that we don't know exactly how much is non-linear, and I will add a re-write to stress that it is only the middle part of the gameplay that changes - presumably the start will be fixed, then options will be presented, then you will reach a conclusion - otherwise it won't fit with the Protoss and Zerg campaign storylines. But I doubt it will be a bunch of optional missions - the mini-missions on the Hyperion sound like they will be optional - you must have to complete a certain number otherwise you wouldn't get the tech for the end of the campaign.  Also I think we should mention the simulator on the Hyperion that was talked about - where you can try out new technologies - that sounds like a nice idea to be able to play around with things outside of the game's combat.  (I'm very new to all this so any advice or ideas much appreciated!)  --SCV Operator 10:36, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Succbus??
Infomation found from where??

Check the Succubus article for the info link.--Hawki 09:14, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

It is also referenced in this article. That's what the references are for. PsiSeveredHead 11:30, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Unlock?
Can this page be unlocked? I wanted to add the Nomad to the list of Terran units, and add the Vulture and the Science Vessel to units that aren't returning (their roles are replaced by the Cobra and the Nomad, respectively, and we haven't heard anything about them at all). Or, alternatively, someone else could just do what I suggested, if appropriate. Elchip 17:23, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I edited as appropriate, and thanks for the advice. Admins aren't omniscient and will miss the most obvious details! StarCraft II is the most visited page on the site (last time I checked, which isn't easy to do if logged in) so it has to be protected by vandalism. Other pages that held "front-page status" also suffered from vandalism, particularly severe (and clever) when the Terran Confederacy held that status. It would really increase the workload of the admins to unlock the page.

In any event, you have signed up, so you shouldn't be locked out anyway (StarCraft II can be edited by people with account names and not just IP addresses). If your account is really new, though, it may take up to four days before you can edit semi-protected pages. I have no control over that delay, sorry. PsiSeveredHead 22:19, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

-Also, the shadow ops, deep space relay, starbase, and munitions depot should be added to new buildings.

Dead site link
The site at the bottom has not been updated since 25 may. There are currently commercial sites such as starcraft2forums.org and free sites like sc2blog.com which are much more updated. The Page is locked. Admins, please update page. (don't linkt to cheap spammy sites please)

Voices
Are the voice actors for the mains returning?

Information is currently limited. The voice actor for Zeratul is not coming back, as he's dead. Kerrigan's voice actor is definitely coming back. Raynor's voice actor looks like he will be replaced, but the decision hasn't been set in stone yet. PsiSeveredHead 12:03, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

codename
can you include the codename, medusa, somewhere in the article. 129.120.159.176 02:16, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Can you tell me when that was published? If so, I'll put it up. PsiSeveredHead 02:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Okay, it's up. PsiSeveredHead 21:58, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Technology ... and Hydralisks?
1) The references to the computer technology (eg Pixel Shader, VRAM, etc) are scattered all over the place. I think the StarCraft II article needs a "Technology and Requirements" section. Does anyone feel like contributing to that?

2) Is there any proof of Hydralisks yet? We've had a reference to Hydralisks here for a long time and it occurs to me that Blizzard never mentioned them (except maybe in artwork, which also has Dragoons and other units in it). PsiSeveredHead 02:57, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

A technology and requirements section is a good idea but being no techie, I'm probably not the one to contribute to it. As for hydralisks...well, maybe just mention that they seemingly appear in artwork. Not absolute proof of course but since the hydralisk is perhaps the most iconic zerg unit, I find it extremely unlikely that Blizzard would scrap it.

At the very least, there could be a "possible units" section for each race or something-the Reaver for the protoss, Firebat for terrans and the hydralisk and ultralisk for zerg.--Hawki 03:11, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Hurry up editing the Zerg units!
Hurry up with the Zerg units sections! You only edit Protoss and Terran units and thats it. Hurry up!

The zerg units aren't there because Blizzard hasn't released them yet. Once again, may I remind you that talk pages are NOT for subjective discussion.--Hawki 00:03, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm Sorry! I am getting bored and things got different. I didn't mean to do all that stuff. IG edit Wraith webpage. Edit Wraith as in the unit was replaced by the Viking. I'm sorry for the new replacing old units policy.

I also saw a photo of the Hydralisk and thought it would be in the game along with the Zergling.(Assaulthead 23:57, 1 October 2007 (UTC))

Psi and Supply
I hope there is no more 200 limit and is more than 200 instead. (Assaulthead 23:58, 1 October 2007 (UTC))

This is so close to spam. You have an FAQ page for a reason. PsiSeveredHead 00:08, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Looking like the Thor getting the axe....?
I really hope the Thor doesn’t get the axe; It’s totally overpowered, but it’s the unit I’m looking most forward to trying out! Rather than nerf the attack, why don’t they just make a cooldown that forces the Thor to go back to a munitions depot and hook up for a “reload” period each time the attack is used? – (At the cost of some resources) Also, make the Thor vulnerable to attack during the reload. This way the player is forced to be more particular where and when the attack is used, doesn’t get to use it all over the map, and has to take greater care during the unit's vulnerable period. At least, the unit would not overshadow the siege tank as much as it does.

One thing I couldn’t gather from the Q&A's – Does the Thor’s built-in attack have splash damage as well? – Equal to the siege tank anyway?

Please sign posts by typing ~, thanks.

You should ask Blizzard at their forums, as only they really know the answers.

It's been stated that the Thor's regular attack does splash damage. Check the Thor page for the reference. PsiSeveredHead 01:29, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Replaced by the Predator?
This page says that the Valkyrie has been replaced by the Predator. One problem: the Predator has been cancelled. Is this intentional or should it be changed? I can't change it right now, so... Capefeather 04:08, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Replaced by...
I'm thinking the "X unit is replaced by Y unit" comments need to go. The fast pace of change means they don't stay accurate long, and we don't need to pay much attention to StarCraft I in a StarCraft II article.

These statements often lend themselves to inaccuracy. For instance, I just deleted the comment that the Scout is replaced by the Phoenix (it isn't). It might be replaced by the Phoenix in the air-to-ground role, but not anything else. The Phoenix is more like a Corsair than a Scout in its air-to-air role (and you can see this in the first Protoss gameplay video).

PsiSeveredHead 23:05, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Put Radar Tower in Canceled Terran Buildings section
Because Radar Tower is no longer available, why don't we put it in Canceled Terran Buildings section?

I'm of the opinion the Radar Tower is gone, but I can't prove it. I'd removed the Radar Tower earlier, but someone put it right back in. PsiSeveredHead 02:41, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

new zerg units
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=252845&page=3 |en&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 seems like neogaf is the only ones to know about this. source is in korean, though. 71.123.183.141 02:12, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

props to aznpxdd from neogaf for the partial translation:

Well, here's the update so far. Can't wait for the pics and vids.

Overlord

The overlord fulfils the same to the swarm. It has the ability to attack.

Zergling

Hydralisk

Lurker

Mutalisk

Baneling

Roach

The roach is a very fast moving unit that recovers health quickly.

Queen

The queen is a vastly different unit. She has the powerful ability to control Zerg base defence. The queen can create special structures and extend creep. It has the ability to create toxic creep. And it can make buildings regen faster.

Varied rates of regeneration appear to be a factor in StarCraft II.

Infestor

The infestor replaces the defiler. It can cast dark swarm.

Corruptor

The corruptor attacks air units. Instead of destroying them, it "corrupts" them. It can cause a large group of units to fight each other, quickly turning the tide of the battle.

Swarm Guardian

The swarm gaurdian is much like the original guardian, but it can now also create broodlings.

Ultralisk

Infested Terran

development of starcraft 2
It'd be nice to have a separate article on the development process of starcraft 2. How the developers adjusted the game from feedback by the community, how they went back and forth on whether to include the Firebat, on modifying the graphics to look less cartooney, and so on. It'd probably be best to do this in retrospect like near the game's release and not while it's happening. This way, we can see how the game progressed from its first showing to 1.0. 18:20, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Festies
In this video, a commentator says at one point (~2:08) that the Zerg can currently infest any building, including Protoss buildings like Pylons. This makes me wonder whether separate links and pages on infested buildings and units are wise. -Capefeather 22:00, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

We'd need solid proof of that.

I'd be amazed if Protoss structures could be infested. At the moment, only Infested Marines can be produced. If there were "Infested Zealots" we'd have been told. If there are no Infested Zealots, then infesting Protoss structures would be pointless. Little errors have cropped up, like Roach attacks. (They're melee, even though lots of people are saying they're ranged.)

If there ends up being lots of infested Terran structures (some sources say any Terran structure can be infested) they'll be combined into one article.PsiSeveredHead 22:59, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Press Conference Report?
This page has some pretty interesting things. It seems a lot of it's known already, though. However, it does talk about infested Protoss buildings (but not about "infested Zealots" - that wouldn't make too much sense lore-wise). It also says stuff about the Phoenix, Swarm Guardian and Overseer. I'm not sure whether this is trustworthy, though We'll see in the next few Q&A batches if not the very next batch, I guess.

Is SC2Forums generally trustworthy? I see that this wiki tends to take info from fansites like Infoceptor, SCL, Teamliquid, etc. but not from, say, SC2Armory (but I think I can see why). -Capefeather 22:45, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

The fansites are generally recognised by Blizzard and would generally be taken as reliable, along with Blizzplanet. Concerning SCArmory...well, I don't know. However, it has some images of new SC2 Zerg structures. Meco might want to take a look at that. ^_^--Hawki 22:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Somebody should add this :

"Yes, the lurker morphed from the Hydralisk. The upgrade to be able to do so was a researched upgrade but I did not mention the Zerg's new upgrade system in my article. Each unit has a "level up" system of upgrades. So instead of upgrading all melee or all ranged attacks, now you upgrade individual units. So you can have level 1, 2, or 3 zerglings. At level 1 they get speed, 2 they get attack and armor and increased attack rate, etc... So it has revolutionized the way the Zerg upgrade."

It's from that site. The guy saying this had gone and played sc2. (This is for certain as he posted pictures of him, Karun, and Dustin... playing sc2)Addictgamer 00:21, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

UGH.. My computer is having some major problems, so here's more useful info which i was gona add. his is page 2 of 3 and describes the queen in more detail. Addictgamer 00:32, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * We don't know whether the Medivac Dropship is different from the regular Dropship or the same thing. Probably the same. -Capefeather 00:51, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

As long as there's some kind of reference, I think it's accurate. This is quite different from the "Mothership was a Judicator Sanctum" stuff we'd seen on fansites earlier. Naturally the stuff might not be 100% accurate, but you could say the same thing about any press site's information. PsiSeveredHead 23:31, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

There was also that whole succubus thing, so I wasn't sure how lenient/strict people were on this kind of thing.

Another question: What determines whether a canceled veteran unit goes on the non-returning list or the canceled list? I saw the Reaver with the canceled units and figured that was the precedent, but now the Medic's been placed in the non-returning list. -Capefeather 05:54, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I hadn't noticed. The Reaver should be under the "non-returning units" then.

In any event, StarCraft Legacy is trustworthy, and it's swimming with info now, so I think it should "trump" the other sources. When I have some time (like tonight) I can put up that info. PsiSeveredHead 11:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

"Canceled and returning units"
Seeing how StarCraft II undergoes a new build each week, does it really make sense to have those sections? PsiSeveredHead 23:31, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Probably not. A mention that StarCraft II sees new units and that some won't return but will be seen in the map editor would suffice. Templates can suffice as far as a list is concerned.--Hawki 12:20, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Page Fixes
I can't find any references to a change in the Reactor. (In fact, some credible sites are saying there are no changes.)

I noticed the trailers/demos/video section has gotten very sadly out of date. Does anyone want to help me fix it?

And yes, the Zerg section still needs fixing.PsiSeveredHead 23:57, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Staggered releases/different builds
Since there were four different builds unveiled, how are the inconsistencies between them going to be handled? For example, the Taiwan build has a Queen's Nest. -Capefeather 04:18, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

All the fansites are frustrated by the inconsistencies (and so far, Blizzard has done virtually nothing to clear things up). Still, I'm not sure that building was a Queen's Nest. Blizzard could just be recycling old art. PsiSeveredHead 11:28, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I figured we should be conservative as well. If in doubt, cut it out. I just had to remove a Queen and Archon ability following that formula. PsiSeveredHead 22:32, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Metzen later changed his mind?
Where did he say this? I'm not very good at finding this stuff, so... -Capefeather 02:39, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

There's no specific source I have, but he's said on many occasions "we're bringing these characters back". (Plus, saying we're bringing back "all" characters isn't very specific, so it shouldn't have been used in the first place.) Kimera 757 (talk) 11:16, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

New scan
Here's the thread with the scan. Here's a thread that has a translation of the interviews. (Resource provided by Capefeather.)

Wow, these are awesome! Kimera 757 (talk) 11:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Races
I have split this into two. To see units list go here. I will be making lot of changes in that article. --SkyWalker 05:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Release Date?
I agree on the policy that release dates from Blizzard itself are really the only ones that we can trust. However, Activision has stated that the game will be released in 2009 here. Considering the relationship between Activision and Blizzard, this may bear consideration. Still, virtually everyone is estimating a 2009 release anyway. I guess it may be worthy of mention in the article, but not portrayed as a distinct date.--Hawki 05:16, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Previously, Activision had suggested that the game would come out in 2008, prompting Blizzard to say they have "differences" with Activision's CEO. I wish I had the link to that article. Also, StarCraft Wire "overstated" the case somewhat. Activision said that StarCraft II "should" come out in 2009. While they'd know more than anyone but Blizzard, truthfully Blizzard probably doesn't know the release date, and there's little point guesstimating until the beta is announced. Kimera 757 (talk) 11:20, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

STARCRAFT II Cancelled??!
http://70.188.233.101:81//cydralol.png

pic from forums

The page doesn't exist (that's the problem with hoax pictures, they're never as good as the pranksters think they are), and it wouldn't make sense for Karune to be giving new info on StarCraft II today if it was just canceled. Kimera 757 (talk) 23:19, 23 September 2008 (UTC)