FANDOM


Sorry for disturbing, but exactly where you find the name of this new units? I think is all amazing :D and I found an image where Alarak use the Votary (the Zealot of Tal'darim).--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 19:51, August 17, 2016 (UTC)

Should be the second citation, there's a video of someone trying Alarak at Gamescon. On mobile now so having trouble bringing it up. Seems like they went all out for this, looks awesome. :D I'll check on votaries, but the devs were calling then supplicants, even if I think votary would be a more accurate name. Subsourian (talk) 20:01, August 17, 2016 (UTC)
No no, I don't mean the Supplicant, I mean the Votaries, the Zealot you see in the LotV campaign used by Tal'darim. I see in a image Alarak use both Supplicants and Votaries, here the image.

http://static2.gamespot.com/uploads/scale_super/123/1239113/3110571-7.jpg --PRISON KEEPER (talk) 20:07, August 17, 2016 (UTC)

Huh good find, it may be a summon ability from Alarak since it doesn't seem to be something you can build from the gateway (at least from the Gamescon build in the video). I'll keep an eye out for that, hopefully as more Gamescon videos come out I can get the full lineup he has. If you can find a source that calls them votaries let me know so I can add them. Subsourian (talk) 02:00, August 18, 2016 (UTC)
In the short story of the Rak'shir they are called Votary, so for logic the should have the same name ingame too--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 02:06, August 18, 2016 (UTC)

BlurbEdit

Where does the blurb come from? I did a word search in the article, but I can't find the text that appears in the quote.--Hawki (talk) 09:06, September 10, 2016 (UTC)

VotaryEdit

Here the Votary image, since the part of them was removed in "development". http://static2.gamespot.com/uploads/scale_super/123/1239113/3110571-7.jpg Now I will add the citation, so this will no happen more ^^--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 10:45, September 11, 2016 (UTC)

The ref I placed in the page give some problems, but I don't know how to fix it, someone can help me please?--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 10:48, September 11, 2016 (UTC)
Concerning the votary, from what I can tell, Alarak uses standard zealots as a unit, but they may be called votaries. The image you show doesn't label them explicitly as votaries, so doesn't tell us much. We only have to wait a few days, so right now, I think it's best to wait, see what they're called, and see if their unit stats differ (though we have a votary page anyway, so they might as well go there).--Hawki (talk) 11:02, September 11, 2016 (UTC)
In shortstory they are called Votary, the low ranking units of Tal'darim, and since we know the "Supplicant" are not called "Votary" for exclusion, they are Votary, right?--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 12:58, September 11, 2016 (UTC)
We know that votaries are low ranking Tal'darim, that's all. Tal'darim use standard zealots in the campaign, so assuming the zealots are votaries in co-op is assumption, unless there's confirmation that that's the case.--Hawki (talk) 13:22, September 11, 2016 (UTC)
Mmmh, yhea, you right, but we know the name that we see in the campaign is not the "right" name, for exemple, the Slayer, in campaign they are called "Stalker", but we know the true name of the Tal'darim Stalker is Slayer. And this make me think about a thing. Since the editor confirm the Archon, Phoenix and Carrier of the Tal'darim are called Shadow Archon, Sky talon and Sky lord, is not more right call them in this way? The name is official since we found it in the editor and we know that is their name, right?--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 16:15, September 11, 2016 (UTC)
Those were only mentioned in the map editor. I don't see why we can't make a note in the carrier article that the Tal'darim call their carriers "sky lords", and create that article as a redirect to the carrier article. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) contribs 19:00, September 11, 2016 (UTC)
Good, if you give me the permission I can create the redirect pages ecc... of this units ^^--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 19:23, September 11, 2016 (UTC)
Are we treating the map editor files as canonical though? There's a difference in approach if we note in the SC2 carrier article that it was called a sky lord in the map editor (which would come under "development") and the carrier lore/baseline article, where we'd be asserting that's what the Tal'darim call their carriers. Slayer and votary get independent articles because the former has an explicit name and unique abilities, the latter because at the least, it's a rank that's confirmed in-universe. The others are quite dubious as to whether they're 'true names' or placeholders, whereas most of the time, Tal'darim have shared unit names with baseline protoss.--Hawki (talk) 21:42, September 11, 2016 (UTC)
We know for sure the Tal'darim units have a different name from the Aiur/Nerazim counterpart, so if we must choose between Carrier (that we know 100% is not the Tal'darim Carrier name) and Sky lord (that is probably the true name of Tal'darim Carrier), make more sense at least make a citation about this (but explain too that exist a possibility about the name is not right), but is even better to add an info 100% wrong. I don't know if I explained well.--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 01:26, September 12, 2016 (UTC)
Chiming in, I don't think we should consider unused editor units to be canon. We have a similar thing with some of the unused Elite Guard of Mengsk like Red Adder or Winged Nightmare, while technically those units appear in the final mission we don't consider the designation of them being "Winged Nightmares" or "Red Adders" to be canon. Same with the Tal'darim; thus far those cut units only had their models reused so the unit shouldn't be considered canon.
However, I do think if there is enough information we should make a separate article for things like the Sky lord, just as a way to present all the information about the cut unit. And there we should note that the Tal'darim versions of that unit use the model. However, since it is cut content I don't think we should refer to Tal'darim carriers as Sky lords until we get something in canon saying that they are, and even in cases like Stalkers vs Slayers there are enough differences where I wouldn't retroactively call all Tal'darim stalkers slayers. Basically since the canon we are presented (the game itself) only calls the unit by their base unit's name, that's all we should go with. Subsourian (talk) 02:07, September 12, 2016 (UTC)
All Tal'darim units have the name of the regular units in the campaign (when they are your enemies), but we know that is not their true name. Btw, I asked to Phill Gonzo if he can confirme the name of this units for Tal'darim, he help me giving some information for my SC1 remake, so I quite sure he will answer to me for give us an official answer.--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 10:14, September 12, 2016 (UTC)
Except we don't know that, that's the point. We know that the slayer exists for instance. That doesn't automatically mean that every Tal'darim stalker is a slayer by default. Likewise, things like the "sky lord" are cut names, and are generally considered non-canon.--Hawki (talk) 11:26, September 12, 2016 (UTC)

StructuresEdit

So, hardly a revelation, but Alarak does have two exclusive structures, the "death council" (based on the twilight council) and "ascendant archives" (variant of the Templar archives). I figured it was best to see what their stats were, to see if they differ, but do you think they need articles, or should be redirects?--Hawki (talk) 09:18, September 12, 2016 (UTC)

I vote separate articles, especially if it has separate stats and a different tooltip description (maybe giving a bit of lore on it or something). And looking at it through a lore context they feel too different to lump together. Subsourian (talk) 12:29, September 12, 2016 (UTC)

Rapid Power Cycling Edit

So I reached level 6 and tried out this upgrade. Absolutely nothing happened. Cooldown stayed at 3. Is it a bug? Did anyone else get the proper cooldown figure? PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) contribs 00:38, September 20, 2016 (UTC)

Apparently it's a bug, others have reported the game. DrakeyC (talk) 21:48, September 20, 2016 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.