|
Hi Everyone,
I'm a big mech fan all around in WoL against all races (even P). So, of course, I was excited to see an addition to the Thor. But for the last hour I have been testing the new Thor addition called "High Impact Payload" on a unit test map.
I am really confused about this weapon: When the cannon is activated it deals 24 flat damage to air (regardless of unit size). Currently, the Javalin missile does 48 damage (12x4) to light and 24 (6x4) damage to non-light. Someone please tell me the point of this weapon; I thought it was supposed to be an answer to heavy air, yet the Javelin deals the same 24 damage to heavy as the "High Impact Payload" (HIP) canon. In fact, the Javilin does splash, so there is even more of a reason never to use HIP. I'm finding it even more cumbersome because you have to continuously target too with no increased damage compared to Javelin.
Can someone please help me understand how why this canon is not less useless than it's brother 250mm strike cannon?
Thank you
EDIT: So many of you are wondering about Colossi in this post. High Impact Payload does not hit colossi - it is a air ONLY weapon. Do not bring this into the discussion. Please go to "simple question simple answers for this." This thread is mainly to discuss the Thor Javelin splash versus HIP - which has close to the same output damage, but one has faster cooldown (HIP) and the other does not. We are getting opinions of "value added" to this ability. Please do not respond to this unless you have a beta key and have tested. Thank you.
|
with the javelin missile you have to count 4 times the armor of the ennemy air unit. So if you target one big unit like broodlord for exemple the high impact payload do more damage.
|
On December 08 2012 10:45 RenZan wrote:
with the javelin missile you have to count 4 times the armor of the ennemy air unit. So if you target one big unit like broodlord for exemple the high impact payload do more damage.
This is correct.
Because the missiles deal damage separated into 4 missiles, armor deductions are counted 4 times. So assuming the target has 1 armor, each of the 6 damage missiles will have its damage reduced to 5, which makes the total damage only 20 instead of 24.
With the cannons, the armor deduction is only counted once for the one instance of damage, so the 24 damage is only reduced to 23. Plus, the cannons have a cooldown of 2 seconds as opposed to the 3 second cooldown that the missiles have, so the cannons end up firing faster.
Using the cannons, one Thor will beat one Broodlord. Using missiles, the Thor loses.
|
I'm not really sure about your "armor" point. Regardless i suggest you test trying to target a heavy BL army with the HIP - your out of range thors just clump up and die to broodlings. Its better to get the splash of the Javelin missile than try to manage a out-of-range clunky unit that is dead by the time it maneuvers past the broodlings. I don't see this being used at all aside from TvT with Battlecruisers versus Thors.
|
On December 08 2012 10:51 eviltomahawk wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 10:45 RenZan wrote:
with the javelin missile you have to count 4 times the armor of the ennemy air unit. So if you target one big unit like broodlord for exemple the high impact payload do more damage. This is correct. Because the missiles deal damage separated into 4 missiles, armor deductions are counted 4 times. So assuming the target has 1 armor, each of the 6 damage missiles will have its damage reduced to 5, which makes the total damage only 20 instead of 24. With the cannons, the armor deduction is only counted once for the one instance of damage, so the 24 damage is only reduced to 23. Plus, the cannons have a cooldown of 2 seconds as opposed to the 3 second cooldown that the missiles have, so the cannons end up firing faster. Using the cannons, one Thor will beat one Broodlord. Using missiles, the Thor loses.
Thanks for the clarification on the armor. But take a look at my last post regarding a heavy BL armor. It becomes a moot point with targeting...you might as well take the Javelin splash instead.
|
|
|
what's the rate of fire (cooldown) for total dps and the range (for both)?
|
On December 08 2012 10:57 y0su wrote:
what's the rate of fire (cooldown) for total dps and the range (for both)?
Dunno about total DPS, but the rate of fire is 2 seconds for the High-Impact Payload cannons and 3 seconds for the missiles. Both have range 10.
|
On December 08 2012 10:57 y0su wrote:
what's the rate of fire (cooldown) for total dps and the range (for both)?
since I'm only concerned about attack versus heavy air (obviously Javelin missile is the better choice for light) it is:
Javelin = 6dmg x 4 hits = 24 total damage with 3 second cooldown. Javelin has splash.
High Impact Payload = 24 flat damage (regardless of air type) with 2 second cool down. HIP no splash.
|
I'm just saying risks outweigh the small small small damage increase reward. Especially if a Protoss has Phoenix in their Carrier or Tempest army or Corruptors with their BL (which always happens). You'll be trying to target all day while your thors clump up and die, when you could have just done more effective damage with splash. Would anyone disagree?
|
with 0/0 upgrates HIP is about 12 dps on a GG lord while the javelins are around 7 ish dps. Brood lords are pretty big so even if your opponent is terrible the splash will still be minimal as the eventually naturally spread out. Given that HIP has 1 more range , i feel its better than javelin against brood lords.
|
The high impact payload right now...sucks. I hope they strengthen it so it let's you deal with carriers/tempest better. I've tried the high impact vs broodlords but with all the broodlings it seems this ability is more geared towards countering carrier/tempest/BCS.
It doesn't feel strong though, try it on a medivac and you're like "wow my thor is just barely hitting it lol."
|
Your claim doesn't make any sense. The range on both things is the same, splash doesn't increase the range that the thors can fire from. How does the lack of splash of the HIP affect targeting at all? And corruptors or pheonix should not be being targeted by your thors. If you're not microing your thors then they won't be effective anyway.
|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
On December 08 2012 11:13 avilo wrote:
The high impact payload right now...sucks. I hope they strengthen it so it let's you deal with carriers/tempest better. I've tried the high impact vs broodlords but with all the broodlings it seems this ability is more geared towards countering carrier/tempest/BCS.
It doesn't feel strong though, try it on a medivac and you're like "wow my thor is just barely hitting it lol."
It's still way more than what happened before.
I found today that I could actually use thors to counter protoss air, I just had massive problems dealing with broodlords purely for the broodling issue.
|
Since Blizz combined the mech & air upgrades, I don't think the Thor needs to be an exceptional anti-air unit.
|
so what are we discussing here? Obviously the 24damage one with 2s CD is better then the 6*4 damage one with 3s CD against broods since they ahve the same range?. Is this even a topic... Noone is claiming that its awsome and counter unit x w/e but that its better isnt really in question, its pretty damn obvious given the numbers.
|
On December 08 2012 11:14 Zyrnak wrote:
Your claim doesn't make any sense. The range on both things is the same, splash doesn't increase the range that the thors can fire from. How does the lack of splash of the HIP affect targeting at all? And corruptors or pheonix should not be being targeted by your thors. If you're not microing your thors then they won't be effective anyway.
a) I would suggest you should try it if you can unit test beta and you will see what I mean against a decent BL army. b) If your opponent positions corruptors or Phoenix in the same vicinity as the Javelin, it will splash both the corruptors and the BL. When I target one BL with a Javelini missile, it typically impacts several of the surrounding Broodlords and/or corruptors (at least to some degree). So what happens with the HIP? I target 1 broodlord and they micro it back...what am I supposed to do...follow it while broodlings block and swarm my entire army? And what if they bring queens with transfuse? It is pretty obvious the zerg knows which BL to transfuse making it even less effective. This weapon makes it far more easy for your opponent to just target micro away from the unit being targeted, while your cluncky thors try to follow it.
|
This should really go into simple questions and answers
High Impact Payload attacks 50% faster
It does better against units with high armor (like Carrier)
It also is better to use High Impact Payload if you are behind in upgrades (unlikely, but possible if you're behind)
I've done lots of tests with huge army sizes with T and P deathballs (thors tanks BCs ravens, carriers voidrays colossi stalkers), and with just basic spreading (only a second spent splitting, so it's doable any time in a real game), the High Impact Payload kept coming out with a noticeable advantage, despite how much clumping there still was.
Perhaps you might want half your thors in explosive, half in high impact, to make him worry about not clumping his units, and maybe it is better if you target fire with the explosive thors to parts of the army that clump a lot. It could be cool seeing this kind of decision making.
|
Wouldn't HIP scale much better into the late game as opposed to the javelin? In the early game where armour values are small, of course having the splash anti-air will be more useful (and it's more geared towards mid game units like mutalisks anyway), but as your enemy gains more armour upgrades and beefier units the javelin becomes quite pitiful.
What I'm trying to say is that the way the upgrades for the javelin work are +1 * 4, so actually for every weapon upgrade you get, your opponent getting an armour upgrade makes it a moot point. However for the HIP you just get a flat +4 damage, so for equal upgrades you're getting 3 extra damage. Including the increase in the weapon speed, this will make thor's anti-air scale incredibly well against armoured targets, something that mech really needed as the javelin becomes rather terrible against late game armies (and the thor is supposed to be a late game unit!).
Overall perhaps the numbers will need to change, but the tradeoff of increased DPS and scalability for splash seems really interesting and will lead to a lot more player experimentation with the thor. Which is pretty cool.
|
|
|
On December 08 2012 11:05 SirPinky wrote:
I'm just saying risks outweigh the small small small damage increase reward. Especially if a Protoss has Phoenix in their Carrier or Tempest army or Corruptors with their BL (which always happens). You'll be trying to target all day while your thors clump up and die, when you could have just done more effective damage with splash. Would anyone disagree?
I think most disagree honestly, and again, the claim that the high inpact is awsome against BLs or carriers isnt there but that its better is pretty obvious. If the dps difference is 5 (12 and 7) then its not a small increase.. its almost the double. And splas doesnt really come into effect vs these units unless the zerg/toss is absolutely horrible. Without knowing the exact numbers the dps difference will get bigger with attack upgrades for the terran and armor for the zerg/toss. Eventually it will be quite huge.
|
On December 08 2012 11:26 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
This should really go into simple questions and answers
High Impact Payload attacks 50% faster
It does better against units with high armor (like Carrier)
It also is better to use High Impact Payload if you are behind in upgrades (unlikely, but possible if you're behind)
I've done lots of tests with huge army sizes with T and P deathballs (thors tanks BCs ravens, carriers voidrays colossi stalkers), and with just basic spreading (only a second spent splitting, so it's doable any time in a real game), the High Impact Payload kept coming out with a noticeable advantage, despite how much clumping there still was.
Perhaps you might want half your thors in explosive, half in high impact, to make him worry about not clumping his units, and maybe it is better if you target fire with the explosive thors to parts of the army that clump a lot. It could be cool seeing this kind of decision making.
This does not belong in simple question simple answer. Please get off your high horse. One does splash the other does not - both do similar damage with HIP having less cooldown. So is +1 cooldown better than splash, not to mention if light units are involved in a engagement is it worth the risk even having the cannon activated. This is far more technical than many of you are letting on.
|
I feel that the only thing that needed to be removed from the thor was really the energy. The HIP is kinda.. pointless. It looks cool but I (imo) would much rather use the javelin missles seeing that they do splash. I feel HIP kind of overlaps with Vikings.
|
I dont know what the problem is....if its not strong enough they will buff it. Why does every act like this is the final product
|
On December 08 2012 11:36 SirPinky wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 11:26 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
This should really go into simple questions and answers
High Impact Payload attacks 50% faster
It does better against units with high armor (like Carrier)
It also is better to use High Impact Payload if you are behind in upgrades (unlikely, but possible if you're behind)
I've done lots of tests with huge army sizes with T and P deathballs (thors tanks BCs ravens, carriers voidrays colossi stalkers), and with just basic spreading (only a second spent splitting, so it's doable any time in a real game), the High Impact Payload kept coming out with a noticeable advantage, despite how much clumping there still was.
Perhaps you might want half your thors in explosive, half in high impact, to make him worry about not clumping his units, and maybe it is better if you target fire with the explosive thors to parts of the army that clump a lot. It could be cool seeing this kind of decision making. This does not belong in simple question simple answer. Please get off your high horse. One does splash the other does not - both do similar damage with HIP having less cooldown. So is +1 cooldown better than splash, not to mention if light units are involved in a engagement is it worth the risk even having the cannon activated. This is far more technical than many of you are letting on.
alright, so against carrier/pheonix this is far more techincal perhaps but vs BL corruptor it is not. No zerg will have mutas in that army so no light units are present.
In a superlate situation the dps difference targetting a fully upgraded BL with a fully upgraded thor is 16dps vs 6.67. No splash will make that worthwhile.
And you claim that splash makes it harder to transfuse? well, it doesnt, its quite the opposite hoestly. With the tickling of the thors on BLs with the splash you have plenty of time to transfuse them all. now, with 6-7thors or how many you have a BL will die fast enough that failing to transfuse is actually possible, there will even come a time when oneshotting a BL is possible.. at 225hp you would need .7 thors with 3attack vs 1armor broods.. that could change alot tbh.
THOUGH
Im making a huge asumption with these numbers , and that is that the high payload gets +4damage per upgrade. Can anyone confirm this?. the dps will still increase aslong as its not 1 but obviously not by as much. 4seemed to be the logical amount since well, the javelin gets 4 in total.
|
On December 08 2012 11:30 doffe wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 11:05 SirPinky wrote:
I'm just saying risks outweigh the small small small damage increase reward. Especially if a Protoss has Phoenix in their Carrier or Tempest army or Corruptors with their BL (which always happens). You'll be trying to target all day while your thors clump up and die, when you could have just done more effective damage with splash. Would anyone disagree? I think most disagree honestly, and again, the claim that the high inpact is awsome against BLs or carriers isnt there but that its better is pretty obvious. If the dps difference is 5 (12 and 7) then its not a small increase.. its almost the double. And splas doesnt really come into effect vs these units unless the zerg/toss is absolutely horrible. Without knowing the exact numbers the dps difference will get bigger with attack upgrades for the terran and armor for the zerg/toss. Eventually it will be quite huge.
Uh, you say "And splas doesnt really come into effect vs these units unless the zerg/toss is absolutely horrible." That's a huge statement. Even pro's have a hard time spreading their units perfectly, while engaging units like viking versus their corruptors. I guess you tacked on that statement to completely nullify my splash damage argument, but I completely disagree with it. Only advantage I might concede is a medium size Carrier or BC army, which it seems more effective. The rest are pretty useless -ill take splash any day over a critical mass Carrier or BL army.
|
On December 08 2012 11:42 LgNKami wrote:
I feel that the only thing that needed to be removed from the thor was really the energy. The HIP is kinda.. pointless. It looks cool but I (imo) would much rather use the javelin missles seeing that they do splash. I feel HIP kind of overlaps with Vikings.
my guess is that this is geared to not forcing the terran to make vikings but having more thors/tanks instead. overlapping with a unit is fine if it means you can skip making unit x.
|
On December 08 2012 11:44 SirPinky wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 11:30 doffe wrote:On December 08 2012 11:05 SirPinky wrote:
I'm just saying risks outweigh the small small small damage increase reward. Especially if a Protoss has Phoenix in their Carrier or Tempest army or Corruptors with their BL (which always happens). You'll be trying to target all day while your thors clump up and die, when you could have just done more effective damage with splash. Would anyone disagree? I think most disagree honestly, and again, the claim that the high inpact is awsome against BLs or carriers isnt there but that its better is pretty obvious. If the dps difference is 5 (12 and 7) then its not a small increase.. its almost the double. And splas doesnt really come into effect vs these units unless the zerg/toss is absolutely horrible. Without knowing the exact numbers the dps difference will get bigger with attack upgrades for the terran and armor for the zerg/toss. Eventually it will be quite huge. Uh, you say "And splas doesnt really come into effect vs these units unless the zerg/toss is absolutely horrible." That's a huge statement. Even pro's have a hard time spreading their units perfectly, while engaging units like viking versus their corruptors. I guess you can tack on that statement to completely nullify my splash damage argument, but I completely disagree with it. Only advantage I might concide is a medium size Carrier or BC army, which it seems more effective. The rest are pretty useless -ill take splash any day over a critical mass Carrier or BL army.
its not like the thor splashradius is superbig. And obviously some splash will occur but I hardly think its enough. And with the lower dps on each target its easier to pull them back and/or transfuse before they die. Id say its better to kill 2 BLs then to get 4 in the red.
|
On December 08 2012 11:44 doffe wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 11:36 SirPinky wrote:On December 08 2012 11:26 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
This should really go into simple questions and answers
High Impact Payload attacks 50% faster
It does better against units with high armor (like Carrier)
It also is better to use High Impact Payload if you are behind in upgrades (unlikely, but possible if you're behind)
I've done lots of tests with huge army sizes with T and P deathballs (thors tanks BCs ravens, carriers voidrays colossi stalkers), and with just basic spreading (only a second spent splitting, so it's doable any time in a real game), the High Impact Payload kept coming out with a noticeable advantage, despite how much clumping there still was.
Perhaps you might want half your thors in explosive, half in high impact, to make him worry about not clumping his units, and maybe it is better if you target fire with the explosive thors to parts of the army that clump a lot. It could be cool seeing this kind of decision making. This does not belong in simple question simple answer. Please get off your high horse. One does splash the other does not - both do similar damage with HIP having less cooldown. So is +1 cooldown better than splash, not to mention if light units are involved in a engagement is it worth the risk even having the cannon activated. This is far more technical than many of you are letting on. alright, so against carrier/pheonix this is far more techincal perhaps but vs BL corruptor it is not. No zerg will have mutas in that army so no light units are present. In a superlate situation the dps difference targetting a fully upgraded BL with a fully upgraded thor is 16dps vs 6.67. No splash will make that worthwhile. And you claim that splash makes it harder to transfuse? well, it doesnt, its quite the opposite hoestly. With the tickling of the thors on BLs with the splash you have plenty of time to transfuse them all. now, with 6-7thors or how many you have a BL will die fast enough that failing to transfuse is actually possible, there will even come a time when oneshotting a BL is possible.. at 225hp you would need .7 thors with 3attack vs 1armor broods.. that could change alot tbh. THOUGH Im making a huge asumption with these numbers , and that is that the high payload gets +4damage per upgrade. Can anyone confirm this?. the dps will still increase aslong as its not 1 but obviously not by as much. 4seemed to be the logical amount since well, the javelin gets 4 in total.
You're missing the corruptor part in BL/corruptor. HIP is just not viable in the combination. Thors and Vikings are typically present in a mech composition versus BL corruptor. When the corruptors start targeting BL, then what happens? Obviously, the Zerg player advances their corruptors to hit the vikings. When this happens Thors prioritize their attacks to hit the corruptors (which generally begin to clump when try to target vikings). The splash is mainly for corruptors not BL. I'd much rather take out all the corruptors and clean up with vikings than risk picking off one BL at a time with HIP while trying to target 1 units at a time with a clunky unit.
|
Thors can help snipe Colossi now, which can help in lategame TvP
|
On December 08 2012 11:53 awesomoecalypse wrote:
Thors can help snipe Colossi now, which can help in lategame TvP
What? No they can't...they will always use the "thor cannon" versus colossi. They are no different than in WoL
|
On December 08 2012 11:57 SirPinky wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 11:53 awesomoecalypse wrote:
Thors can help snipe Colossi now, which can help in lategame TvP What? No they can't...they will always use the "thor cannon" versus colossi. They are no different than in WoL
Longer range = everything. They outrange Colossi now.
Also, something everyone seems to be forgetting in the BL vs Thor debate: You won't go mass Thor vs Mass BL. Other factors play in, like Hellions.
|
On December 08 2012 11:53 SirPinky wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 11:44 doffe wrote:On December 08 2012 11:36 SirPinky wrote:On December 08 2012 11:26 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
This should really go into simple questions and answers
High Impact Payload attacks 50% faster
It does better against units with high armor (like Carrier)
It also is better to use High Impact Payload if you are behind in upgrades (unlikely, but possible if you're behind)
I've done lots of tests with huge army sizes with T and P deathballs (thors tanks BCs ravens, carriers voidrays colossi stalkers), and with just basic spreading (only a second spent splitting, so it's doable any time in a real game), the High Impact Payload kept coming out with a noticeable advantage, despite how much clumping there still was.
Perhaps you might want half your thors in explosive, half in high impact, to make him worry about not clumping his units, and maybe it is better if you target fire with the explosive thors to parts of the army that clump a lot. It could be cool seeing this kind of decision making. This does not belong in simple question simple answer. Please get off your high horse. One does splash the other does not - both do similar damage with HIP having less cooldown. So is +1 cooldown better than splash, not to mention if light units are involved in a engagement is it worth the risk even having the cannon activated. This is far more technical than many of you are letting on. alright, so against carrier/pheonix this is far more techincal perhaps but vs BL corruptor it is not. No zerg will have mutas in that army so no light units are present. In a superlate situation the dps difference targetting a fully upgraded BL with a fully upgraded thor is 16dps vs 6.67. No splash will make that worthwhile. And you claim that splash makes it harder to transfuse? well, it doesnt, its quite the opposite hoestly. With the tickling of the thors on BLs with the splash you have plenty of time to transfuse them all. now, with 6-7thors or how many you have a BL will die fast enough that failing to transfuse is actually possible, there will even come a time when oneshotting a BL is possible.. at 225hp you would need .7 thors with 3attack vs 1armor broods.. that could change alot tbh. THOUGH Im making a huge asumption with these numbers , and that is that the high payload gets +4damage per upgrade. Can anyone confirm this?. the dps will still increase aslong as its not 1 but obviously not by as much. 4seemed to be the logical amount since well, the javelin gets 4 in total. You're missing the corruptor part in BL/corruptor. HIP is just not viable in the combination. Thors and Vikings are typically present in a mech composition versus BL corruptor. When the corruptors start targeting BL, then what happens? Obviously, the Zerg player advances their corruptors to hit the vikings. When this happens Thors prioritize their attacks to hit the corruptors (which generally begin to clump when try to target vikings). The splash is mainly for corruptors not BL. I'd much rather take out all the corruptors and clean up with vikings than risk picking off one BL at a time with HIP while trying to target 1 units at a time with a clunky unit.
you could simply not make vikings now if the thor is actually good at singletargetting BLs. I asume this is the biggest point of this upgrade, to give the option to counter zerg lategame with pure ground, making the switch back and forth to ultras alot less potent. viking and thordps vs broods will be basically the same but you will most likely be far ahead on ground upgrades.
Sure, vikings are cheaper but if making no vikings has the zerg with plenty of useless corrupters thats fine.
1question aswell, at what level are you playing?
|
On December 08 2012 11:59 iKill wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 11:57 SirPinky wrote:On December 08 2012 11:53 awesomoecalypse wrote:
Thors can help snipe Colossi now, which can help in lategame TvP What? No they can't...they will always use the "thor cannon" versus colossi. They are no different than in WoL Longer range = everything. They outrange Colossi now. Also, something everyone seems to be forgetting in the BL vs Thor debate: You won't go mass Thor vs Mass BL. Other factors play in, like Hellions.
Thor vs BL debate aside, b/c it is a big one. They don't outrange Colossi with thermal lance. Anyone that doesn't have thermal lance (in general) shouldn't be going colossus unless they have some one base timing up their sleeve. I see no change Colossi versus Thor.
|
On December 08 2012 12:04 SirPinky wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 11:59 iKill wrote:On December 08 2012 11:57 SirPinky wrote:On December 08 2012 11:53 awesomoecalypse wrote:
Thors can help snipe Colossi now, which can help in lategame TvP What? No they can't...they will always use the "thor cannon" versus colossi. They are no different than in WoL Longer range = everything. They outrange Colossi now. Also, something everyone seems to be forgetting in the BL vs Thor debate: You won't go mass Thor vs Mass BL. Other factors play in, like Hellions. Thor vs BL debate aside, b/c it is a big one. They don't outrange Colossi with thermal lance. Anyone that doesn't have thermal lance (in general) shouldn't be going colossus unless they have some one base timing up their sleeve. I see no change Colossi versus Thor.
Colossus with Thermal Lance is range 9. HIP is range 10.
|
On December 08 2012 12:03 doffe wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 11:53 SirPinky wrote:On December 08 2012 11:44 doffe wrote:On December 08 2012 11:36 SirPinky wrote:On December 08 2012 11:26 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
This should really go into simple questions and answers
High Impact Payload attacks 50% faster
It does better against units with high armor (like Carrier)
It also is better to use High Impact Payload if you are behind in upgrades (unlikely, but possible if you're behind)
I've done lots of tests with huge army sizes with T and P deathballs (thors tanks BCs ravens, carriers voidrays colossi stalkers), and with just basic spreading (only a second spent splitting, so it's doable any time in a real game), the High Impact Payload kept coming out with a noticeable advantage, despite how much clumping there still was.
Perhaps you might want half your thors in explosive, half in high impact, to make him worry about not clumping his units, and maybe it is better if you target fire with the explosive thors to parts of the army that clump a lot. It could be cool seeing this kind of decision making. This does not belong in simple question simple answer. Please get off your high horse. One does splash the other does not - both do similar damage with HIP having less cooldown. So is +1 cooldown better than splash, not to mention if light units are involved in a engagement is it worth the risk even having the cannon activated. This is far more technical than many of you are letting on. alright, so against carrier/pheonix this is far more techincal perhaps but vs BL corruptor it is not. No zerg will have mutas in that army so no light units are present. In a superlate situation the dps difference targetting a fully upgraded BL with a fully upgraded thor is 16dps vs 6.67. No splash will make that worthwhile. And you claim that splash makes it harder to transfuse? well, it doesnt, its quite the opposite hoestly. With the tickling of the thors on BLs with the splash you have plenty of time to transfuse them all. now, with 6-7thors or how many you have a BL will die fast enough that failing to transfuse is actually possible, there will even come a time when oneshotting a BL is possible.. at 225hp you would need .7 thors with 3attack vs 1armor broods.. that could change alot tbh. THOUGH Im making a huge asumption with these numbers , and that is that the high payload gets +4damage per upgrade. Can anyone confirm this?. the dps will still increase aslong as its not 1 but obviously not by as much. 4seemed to be the logical amount since well, the javelin gets 4 in total. You're missing the corruptor part in BL/corruptor. HIP is just not viable in the combination. Thors and Vikings are typically present in a mech composition versus BL corruptor. When the corruptors start targeting BL, then what happens? Obviously, the Zerg player advances their corruptors to hit the vikings. When this happens Thors prioritize their attacks to hit the corruptors (which generally begin to clump when try to target vikings). The splash is mainly for corruptors not BL. I'd much rather take out all the corruptors and clean up with vikings than risk picking off one BL at a time with HIP while trying to target 1 units at a time with a clunky unit. you could simply not make vikings now if the thor is actually good at singletargetting BLs. I asume this is the biggest point of this upgrade, to give the option to counter zerg lategame with pure ground, making the switch back and forth to ultras alot less potent. viking and thordps vs broods will be basically the same but you will most likely be far ahead on ground upgrades. Sure, vikings are cheaper but if making no vikings has the zerg with plenty of useless corrupters thats fine. 1question aswell, at what level are you playing?
I'm GM toss High master T.
And, no, you can't go mass Thors now with this upgrade. BL armies will always defeat them overwhelmingly in a maxed thor versus maxed BL army. You need air support, that how Blizzard designed it. My argument is there really isn't any significant change with the HIP; I find splash more viable for most unit compositions.
|
The people who thinks it outrages collosi without thermal are incorrect. It NEVER attacks collosi with its anti-air attacks, it just uses its stronger attack vs ground, which is better, but has less range. Even if it is in range for the new AA attack but not for the ground attack is simply tries to get closer to use its regular ground attack.
|
On December 08 2012 12:06 awesomoecalypse wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 12:04 SirPinky wrote:On December 08 2012 11:59 iKill wrote:On December 08 2012 11:57 SirPinky wrote:On December 08 2012 11:53 awesomoecalypse wrote:
Thors can help snipe Colossi now, which can help in lategame TvP What? No they can't...they will always use the "thor cannon" versus colossi. They are no different than in WoL Longer range = everything. They outrange Colossi now. Also, something everyone seems to be forgetting in the BL vs Thor debate: You won't go mass Thor vs Mass BL. Other factors play in, like Hellions. Thor vs BL debate aside, b/c it is a big one. They don't outrange Colossi with thermal lance. Anyone that doesn't have thermal lance (in general) shouldn't be going colossus unless they have some one base timing up their sleeve. I see no change Colossi versus Thor. Colossus with Thermal Lance is range 9. HIP is range 10.
Your Thor Hammer is used to hit Colossi not HIP. HIP cannot hit Colossi and the Thor Hammer only has 7 range.
|
The Aoe is most likely much better from the Javelin than the IAS on the HIP in terms of raw damage. I feel like it would be cool to have a High damage single target attack with like 3.5 second cooldown.
Edit: the armor argument is bad because you should assume equal attack upgrades, thus when you equip both sides equally the math is negated.
|
Sometimes you might just want to target fire down the BLs. You don't necessarily wants to have splash to deal with corruptors or other flying units. HIP lets you target fire with (say 5 thors) and it can gun down couple BLs quite fast. Whereas, the javelin is much slower and less effective.
You might keep it in Javelin mode if you want, but when the BLs come spread out, it is too late to change mode.
|
On December 08 2012 12:17 bhfberserk wrote:
Sometimes you might just want to target fire down the BLs. You don't necessarily wants to have splash to deal with corruptors or other flying units. HIP lets you target fire with (say 5 thors) and it can gun down couple BLs quite fast. Whereas, the javelin is much slower and less effective.
You might keep it in Javelin mode if you want, but when the BLs come spread out, it is too late to change mode.
I'll let you know when I see a single, spreadout, BL army come without any support 
|
On December 08 2012 11:42 LgNKami wrote:
I feel that the only thing that needed to be removed from the thor was really the energy. The HIP is kinda.. pointless. It looks cool but I (imo) would much rather use the javelin missles seeing that they do splash. I feel HIP kind of overlaps with Vikings.
good point. Thor/Banshee 2-base timings become viable again without feedback. Interesting concept.
|
United Arab Emirates439 Posts
Pointing out that a bunch of Thors doesn't beat a bunch of Brood Lords with this new ability is meaningless. Why should they, and how is that a realistic scenario? Very often the Mech player will have a ground force to deal with the broodlings and tank some of them.
It's simple: The numbers are there - against non light units it does ~50% more DPS. (there are some particulars like the splash benefits from upgrades by 1 damage more per upgrade, but that still doesn't make up for the 50% slower attack).
I do agree it's a fairly niche attack and nothing amazing or game changing. Splash is so good vs Air units that vs multiple non-light units it could still be better to use the splash attack, as just one splash on one other unit doubles your damage for that attack, so it can quickly overcome that 50% slower attack rate. Still, it's unarguable that it's an improvement over the splash attack in some situations.
But with this new shared air upgrades, I really don't understand the argument that Thors ALSO need to have some amazing non-light attack.
Once again, your Brood Lord example is meaningless - the numbers speak for themselves. And a good opponent won't clump them up very often. It's up to you to decide if you want to take that chance to exploit your opponent clumping, or you want to play it safe and have a decently better attack if they don't mess up.
|
On December 08 2012 11:36 SirPinky wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 11:26 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
This should really go into simple questions and answers
High Impact Payload attacks 50% faster
It does better against units with high armor (like Carrier)
It also is better to use High Impact Payload if you are behind in upgrades (unlikely, but possible if you're behind)
I've done lots of tests with huge army sizes with T and P deathballs (thors tanks BCs ravens, carriers voidrays colossi stalkers), and with just basic spreading (only a second spent splitting, so it's doable any time in a real game), the High Impact Payload kept coming out with a noticeable advantage, despite how much clumping there still was.
Perhaps you might want half your thors in explosive, half in high impact, to make him worry about not clumping his units, and maybe it is better if you target fire with the explosive thors to parts of the army that clump a lot. It could be cool seeing this kind of decision making. This does not belong in simple question simple answer. Please get off your high horse. One does splash the other does not - both do similar damage with HIP having less cooldown. So is +1 cooldown better than splash, not to mention if light units are involved in a engagement is it worth the risk even having the cannon activated. This is far more technical than many of you are letting on.
It's as simple as testing it out in a unit tester yourself, and seeing the results. Many of the questions asked in Simple questions and answers are like that. "Does X beat Y with this in this situation"
Also, even David Kim explained that the purpose was for it to do better against armored air units. That pretty much answers the thread. He didn't say it directly but the meaning is implied
As such, we’ve given the Thor a new weapon that can be swapped with its anti-light, AoE weapon when it may be more useful for a particular situation. What isn't anti-light and AOE is a weapon that is better against non-light (basically, armored) units and has no AOE.
On December 08 2012 11:27 GattAttack wrote:
Wouldn't HIP scale much better into the late game as opposed to the javelin? In the early game where armour values are small, of course having the splash anti-air will be more useful (and it's more geared towards mid game units like mutalisks anyway), but as your enemy gains more armour upgrades and beefier units the javelin becomes quite pitiful.
What I'm trying to say is that the way the upgrades for the javelin work are +1 * 4, so actually for every weapon upgrade you get, your opponent getting an armour upgrade makes it a moot point. However for the HIP you just get a flat +4 damage, so for equal upgrades you're getting 3 extra damage. Including the increase in the weapon speed, this will make thor's anti-air scale incredibly well against armoured targets, something that mech really needed as the javelin becomes rather terrible against late game armies (and the thor is supposed to be a late game unit!).
Overall perhaps the numbers will need to change, but the tradeoff of increased DPS and scalability for splash seems really interesting and will lead to a lot more player experimentation with the thor. Which is pretty cool.
They increase by 4? wow, then yes you're right
|
United Arab Emirates439 Posts
They increase by 4? wow, then yes you're right
He is incorrect. The non-splash attack increases by 2, not 4. So it get's only a +3 (1 extra because it attacks 50% more in the same time frame) increase in DPS compared to the Splash attack which gets a +4. Even with +3 upgrades this difference isn't significant enough to make the Splash better in a situation where it already wasn't, and vice versa.
Of course what GattAttack said is true though - because it increases by a flat 2 instead of 1*4, the upgrades aren't cancelled out if the opponent only matches you in Armor upgrades.
I would just like to point out that in the late game, vs any decent number of air units, clumping is almost an inevitability. Just one instance of splash at all with the attack almost without fail will make the splash attack a better option in late game engagements vs anything but perhaps BC's and Carriers - who tend to clump the least and have particularly high base armor.
|
What I don't understand about it is the overlap with Vikings. Merged upgrades gives pretty much no reason to not just build the damn Vikings. The Broods can't hit 'em. Yeah, they have to deal with Corruptors and Infestors, but that's just not quite the same.
|
On December 08 2012 13:28 ZjiublingZ wrote:He is incorrect. The non-splash attack increases by 2, not 4. So it get's only a +3 (1 extra because it attacks 50% more in the same time frame) increase in DPS compared to the Splash attack which gets a +4. Even with +3 upgrades this difference isn't significant enough to make the Splash better in a situation where it already wasn't, and vice versa. Of course what GattAttack said is true though - because it increases by a flat 2 instead of 1*4, the upgrades aren't cancelled out if the opponent only matches you in Armor upgrades. I would just like to point out that in the late game, vs any decent number of air units, clumping is almost an inevitability. Just one instance of splash at all with the attack almost without fail will make the splash attack a better option in late game engagements vs anything but perhaps BC's and Carriers - who tend to clump the least and have particularly high base armor.
Ah, ok I see, that's nice. Yeah, against units like voids and phoenix and even BL and corruptor (unless in small numbers) splash will probably be good. I tested it out against a bunch of carriers (clumped) and the splash was so little.
I got a question about the splash actually, I think i'm confusing it with the [old?] ultra splash mechanics.
So if you hit a carrier, and the next carrier is further than 0.5 away from the center of the first carrier, does it get splashed? Or does the outside of the unit have to be within 0.5 of the outside of the other?
On December 08 2012 13:39 Acritter wrote:
What I don't understand about it is the overlap with Vikings. Merged upgrades gives pretty much no reason to not just build the damn Vikings. The Broods can't hit 'em. Yeah, they have to deal with Corruptors and Infestors, but that's just not quite the same.
As they noted, I think it's just to buff mech in general. Both Thors and Vikings are stronger now. This makes it less unforgiving too, if you happen to not have enough vikings out on the map and have only thors for AA. I like this direction of being more forgiving.
|
United Arab Emirates439 Posts
On December 08 2012 13:39 Acritter wrote:
What I don't understand about it is the overlap with Vikings. Merged upgrades gives pretty much no reason to not just build the damn Vikings. The Broods can't hit 'em. Yeah, they have to deal with Corruptors and Infestors, but that's just not quite the same.
If I had to guess? It's because Thors are becoming less useful in HotS, while other races air units are becoming stronger. What with the Widow Mine providing another anti-air option for Mech, Thors being pretty bad against almost every Protoss air unit (even with the bonus damage vs Phoenix and Oracles, I personally would prefer to have Vikings against at least the Oracles because of their mobility). And Protoss air units only getting considerably stronger (except the Tempest). Not to mention in vs Zerg Swarm Hosts can really force the T away from making any more than 2-3 Thors, the same is true for Roach/Hydra. Honestly I don't see Thors being a very common unit to make with or without this buff, might as well give them this extra utility. Not to mention it puts in place an attack they can buff if they decide to alter the Mech + Air shared upgrades - because this could very well be too strong.
|
its slightly better vs bl's and corruptors and amazingly better vs bc cuz of bc high armor. Still both bc and bl beat thor(supply/cost).
|
On December 08 2012 13:56 ZjiublingZ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 13:39 Acritter wrote:
What I don't understand about it is the overlap with Vikings. Merged upgrades gives pretty much no reason to not just build the damn Vikings. The Broods can't hit 'em. Yeah, they have to deal with Corruptors and Infestors, but that's just not quite the same. If I had to guess? It's because Thors are becoming less useful in HotS, while other races air units are becoming stronger. What with the Widow Mine providing another anti-air option for Mech, Thors being pretty bad against almost every Protoss air unit (even with the bonus damage vs Phoenix and Oracles, I personally would prefer to have Vikings against at least the Oracles because of their mobility). And Protoss air units only getting considerably stronger (except the Tempest). Not to mention in vs Zerg Swarm Hosts can really force the T away from making any more than 2-3 Thors, the same is true for Roach/Hydra. Honestly I don't see Thors being a very common unit to make with or without this buff, might as well give them this extra utility. Not to mention it puts in place an attack they can buff if they decide to alter the Mech + Air shared upgrades - because this could very well be too strong.
I guess that might be it. I'd like to see a more complete Thor redesign in that case, though. Maybe as a kind of anti-Archon unit, because that seems like what Mech struggles with.
|
United Arab Emirates439 Posts
On December 08 2012 14:11 Acritter wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 13:56 ZjiublingZ wrote:On December 08 2012 13:39 Acritter wrote:
What I don't understand about it is the overlap with Vikings. Merged upgrades gives pretty much no reason to not just build the damn Vikings. The Broods can't hit 'em. Yeah, they have to deal with Corruptors and Infestors, but that's just not quite the same. If I had to guess? It's because Thors are becoming less useful in HotS, while other races air units are becoming stronger. What with the Widow Mine providing another anti-air option for Mech, Thors being pretty bad against almost every Protoss air unit (even with the bonus damage vs Phoenix and Oracles, I personally would prefer to have Vikings against at least the Oracles because of their mobility). And Protoss air units only getting considerably stronger (except the Tempest). Not to mention in vs Zerg Swarm Hosts can really force the T away from making any more than 2-3 Thors, the same is true for Roach/Hydra. Honestly I don't see Thors being a very common unit to make with or without this buff, might as well give them this extra utility. Not to mention it puts in place an attack they can buff if they decide to alter the Mech + Air shared upgrades - because this could very well be too strong. I guess that might be it. I'd like to see a more complete Thor redesign in that case, though. Maybe as a kind of anti-Archon unit, because that seems like what Mech struggles with.
lol Thors basically are an anti-Archon unit. They trade with them SO well. But I understand your point - the unit doesn't feel totally fitting compared to many other units, especially in the Mech composition. I think we should really see how things shake out though first before we conclude they should be scrapped. It isn't as if players are going to make 0 Thors in any match-up. ZvT for obvious reasons, ZvP they are still good to have a few of in a maxed army because of their HP and blocking ability, and still having good DPS. In TvT they are pretty meh, but can be useful for defending from air switches when you lack the appropriate Starport production (same goes for vs Protoss and Zerg). Going for a redesign of them would be pretty bold and it's hard to think of the effects it could have on every match-up.
|
On December 08 2012 14:17 ZjiublingZ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 14:11 Acritter wrote:On December 08 2012 13:56 ZjiublingZ wrote:On December 08 2012 13:39 Acritter wrote:
What I don't understand about it is the overlap with Vikings. Merged upgrades gives pretty much no reason to not just build the damn Vikings. The Broods can't hit 'em. Yeah, they have to deal with Corruptors and Infestors, but that's just not quite the same. If I had to guess? It's because Thors are becoming less useful in HotS, while other races air units are becoming stronger. What with the Widow Mine providing another anti-air option for Mech, Thors being pretty bad against almost every Protoss air unit (even with the bonus damage vs Phoenix and Oracles, I personally would prefer to have Vikings against at least the Oracles because of their mobility). And Protoss air units only getting considerably stronger (except the Tempest). Not to mention in vs Zerg Swarm Hosts can really force the T away from making any more than 2-3 Thors, the same is true for Roach/Hydra. Honestly I don't see Thors being a very common unit to make with or without this buff, might as well give them this extra utility. Not to mention it puts in place an attack they can buff if they decide to alter the Mech + Air shared upgrades - because this could very well be too strong. I guess that might be it. I'd like to see a more complete Thor redesign in that case, though. Maybe as a kind of anti-Archon unit, because that seems like what Mech struggles with. lol Thors basically are an anti-Archon unit. They trade with them SO well. But I understand your point - the unit doesn't feel totally fitting compared to many other units, especially in the Mech composition. I think we should really see how things shake out though first before we conclude they should be scrapped. It isn't as if players are going to make 0 Thors in any match-up. ZvT for obvious reasons, ZvP they are still good to have a few of in a maxed army because of their HP and blocking ability, and still having good DPS. In TvT they are pretty meh, but can be useful for defending from air switches when you lack the appropriate Starport production (same goes for vs Protoss and Zerg). Going for a redesign of them would be pretty bold and it's hard to think of the effects it could have on every match-up.
It's about how FAST they trade with Archons. Archons aren't good against mech because they do a ton of damage. That's the job of Zealots and Immortals. They're good because they soak up immense amounts of damage. Ever since BW, mech has always been a glass cannon strategy. You pray that your Tanks and Vultures can do enough damage before the enemy closes in, because once they do you're in serious trouble. Thors are bulky and as such trade excellently against Archons, but that's not what they need to win the battle.
|
United Arab Emirates439 Posts
On December 08 2012 14:25 Acritter wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 14:17 ZjiublingZ wrote:On December 08 2012 14:11 Acritter wrote:On December 08 2012 13:56 ZjiublingZ wrote:On December 08 2012 13:39 Acritter wrote:
What I don't understand about it is the overlap with Vikings. Merged upgrades gives pretty much no reason to not just build the damn Vikings. The Broods can't hit 'em. Yeah, they have to deal with Corruptors and Infestors, but that's just not quite the same. If I had to guess? It's because Thors are becoming less useful in HotS, while other races air units are becoming stronger. What with the Widow Mine providing another anti-air option for Mech, Thors being pretty bad against almost every Protoss air unit (even with the bonus damage vs Phoenix and Oracles, I personally would prefer to have Vikings against at least the Oracles because of their mobility). And Protoss air units only getting considerably stronger (except the Tempest). Not to mention in vs Zerg Swarm Hosts can really force the T away from making any more than 2-3 Thors, the same is true for Roach/Hydra. Honestly I don't see Thors being a very common unit to make with or without this buff, might as well give them this extra utility. Not to mention it puts in place an attack they can buff if they decide to alter the Mech + Air shared upgrades - because this could very well be too strong. I guess that might be it. I'd like to see a more complete Thor redesign in that case, though. Maybe as a kind of anti-Archon unit, because that seems like what Mech struggles with. lol Thors basically are an anti-Archon unit. They trade with them SO well. But I understand your point - the unit doesn't feel totally fitting compared to many other units, especially in the Mech composition. I think we should really see how things shake out though first before we conclude they should be scrapped. It isn't as if players are going to make 0 Thors in any match-up. ZvT for obvious reasons, ZvP they are still good to have a few of in a maxed army because of their HP and blocking ability, and still having good DPS. In TvT they are pretty meh, but can be useful for defending from air switches when you lack the appropriate Starport production (same goes for vs Protoss and Zerg). Going for a redesign of them would be pretty bold and it's hard to think of the effects it could have on every match-up. It's about how FAST they trade with Archons. Archons aren't good against mech because they do a ton of damage. That's the job of Zealots and Immortals. They're good because they soak up immense amounts of damage. Ever since BW, mech has always been a glass cannon strategy. You pray that your Tanks and Vultures can do enough damage before the enemy closes in, because once they do you're in serious trouble. Thors are bulky and as such trade excellently against Archons, but that's not what they need to win the battle.
I totally agree, Archons are pretty good vs Mech because of their non-armored type and high hit points. Still, they aren't that scary by any means and I don't think it's something that Mech needs a better counter for, not at all. Even with their new bonus damage against Battle-Hellions. Archons are really used just because they are the best gas dump in the mineral heavy anti-Mech Protoss composition of Immortal/Chargelot (and they of course are made from HT who are fairly useful vs Mech). Thors got a big buff vs Templar tech by the energy removal anyways.
Once again, I think it's extremely premature to say Thors should be redesigned - especially as an anti-Archon unit. They may end up being quite strong as Mech vs Protoss as is.
|
On December 08 2012 14:33 ZjiublingZ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 14:25 Acritter wrote:On December 08 2012 14:17 ZjiublingZ wrote:On December 08 2012 14:11 Acritter wrote:On December 08 2012 13:56 ZjiublingZ wrote:On December 08 2012 13:39 Acritter wrote:
What I don't understand about it is the overlap with Vikings. Merged upgrades gives pretty much no reason to not just build the damn Vikings. The Broods can't hit 'em. Yeah, they have to deal with Corruptors and Infestors, but that's just not quite the same. If I had to guess? It's because Thors are becoming less useful in HotS, while other races air units are becoming stronger. What with the Widow Mine providing another anti-air option for Mech, Thors being pretty bad against almost every Protoss air unit (even with the bonus damage vs Phoenix and Oracles, I personally would prefer to have Vikings against at least the Oracles because of their mobility). And Protoss air units only getting considerably stronger (except the Tempest). Not to mention in vs Zerg Swarm Hosts can really force the T away from making any more than 2-3 Thors, the same is true for Roach/Hydra. Honestly I don't see Thors being a very common unit to make with or without this buff, might as well give them this extra utility. Not to mention it puts in place an attack they can buff if they decide to alter the Mech + Air shared upgrades - because this could very well be too strong. I guess that might be it. I'd like to see a more complete Thor redesign in that case, though. Maybe as a kind of anti-Archon unit, because that seems like what Mech struggles with. lol Thors basically are an anti-Archon unit. They trade with them SO well. But I understand your point - the unit doesn't feel totally fitting compared to many other units, especially in the Mech composition. I think we should really see how things shake out though first before we conclude they should be scrapped. It isn't as if players are going to make 0 Thors in any match-up. ZvT for obvious reasons, ZvP they are still good to have a few of in a maxed army because of their HP and blocking ability, and still having good DPS. In TvT they are pretty meh, but can be useful for defending from air switches when you lack the appropriate Starport production (same goes for vs Protoss and Zerg). Going for a redesign of them would be pretty bold and it's hard to think of the effects it could have on every match-up. It's about how FAST they trade with Archons. Archons aren't good against mech because they do a ton of damage. That's the job of Zealots and Immortals. They're good because they soak up immense amounts of damage. Ever since BW, mech has always been a glass cannon strategy. You pray that your Tanks and Vultures can do enough damage before the enemy closes in, because once they do you're in serious trouble. Thors are bulky and as such trade excellently against Archons, but that's not what they need to win the battle. I totally agree, Archons are pretty good vs Mech because of their non-armored type and high hit points. Still, they aren't that scary by any means and I don't think it's something that Mech needs a better counter for, not at all. Even with their new bonus damage against Battle-Hellions. Archons are really used just because they are the best gas dump in the mineral heavy anti-Mech Protoss composition of Immortal/Chargelot (and they of course are made from HT who are fairly useful vs Mech). Thors got a big buff vs Templar tech by the energy removal anyways. Once again, I think it's extremely premature to say Thors should be redesigned - especially as an anti-Archon unit. They may end up being quite strong as Mech vs Protoss as is.
Perhaps. I'm still just really unexcited about where the Thor currently is. It just doesn't seem to offer as much to the game as it ought to.
|
United Arab Emirates439 Posts
On December 08 2012 14:39 Acritter wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 14:33 ZjiublingZ wrote:On December 08 2012 14:25 Acritter wrote:On December 08 2012 14:17 ZjiublingZ wrote:On December 08 2012 14:11 Acritter wrote:On December 08 2012 13:56 ZjiublingZ wrote:On December 08 2012 13:39 Acritter wrote:
What I don't understand about it is the overlap with Vikings. Merged upgrades gives pretty much no reason to not just build the damn Vikings. The Broods can't hit 'em. Yeah, they have to deal with Corruptors and Infestors, but that's just not quite the same. If I had to guess? It's because Thors are becoming less useful in HotS, while other races air units are becoming stronger. What with the Widow Mine providing another anti-air option for Mech, Thors being pretty bad against almost every Protoss air unit (even with the bonus damage vs Phoenix and Oracles, I personally would prefer to have Vikings against at least the Oracles because of their mobility). And Protoss air units only getting considerably stronger (except the Tempest). Not to mention in vs Zerg Swarm Hosts can really force the T away from making any more than 2-3 Thors, the same is true for Roach/Hydra. Honestly I don't see Thors being a very common unit to make with or without this buff, might as well give them this extra utility. Not to mention it puts in place an attack they can buff if they decide to alter the Mech + Air shared upgrades - because this could very well be too strong. I guess that might be it. I'd like to see a more complete Thor redesign in that case, though. Maybe as a kind of anti-Archon unit, because that seems like what Mech struggles with. lol Thors basically are an anti-Archon unit. They trade with them SO well. But I understand your point - the unit doesn't feel totally fitting compared to many other units, especially in the Mech composition. I think we should really see how things shake out though first before we conclude they should be scrapped. It isn't as if players are going to make 0 Thors in any match-up. ZvT for obvious reasons, ZvP they are still good to have a few of in a maxed army because of their HP and blocking ability, and still having good DPS. In TvT they are pretty meh, but can be useful for defending from air switches when you lack the appropriate Starport production (same goes for vs Protoss and Zerg). Going for a redesign of them would be pretty bold and it's hard to think of the effects it could have on every match-up. It's about how FAST they trade with Archons. Archons aren't good against mech because they do a ton of damage. That's the job of Zealots and Immortals. They're good because they soak up immense amounts of damage. Ever since BW, mech has always been a glass cannon strategy. You pray that your Tanks and Vultures can do enough damage before the enemy closes in, because once they do you're in serious trouble. Thors are bulky and as such trade excellently against Archons, but that's not what they need to win the battle. I totally agree, Archons are pretty good vs Mech because of their non-armored type and high hit points. Still, they aren't that scary by any means and I don't think it's something that Mech needs a better counter for, not at all. Even with their new bonus damage against Battle-Hellions. Archons are really used just because they are the best gas dump in the mineral heavy anti-Mech Protoss composition of Immortal/Chargelot (and they of course are made from HT who are fairly useful vs Mech). Thors got a big buff vs Templar tech by the energy removal anyways. Once again, I think it's extremely premature to say Thors should be redesigned - especially as an anti-Archon unit. They may end up being quite strong as Mech vs Protoss as is. Perhaps. I'm still just really unexcited about where the Thor currently is. It just doesn't seem to offer as much to the game as it ought to.
I can understand that sentiment for sure, but we will have to see how much it does indeed offer to the game once things really pan out.
|
1 Thor vs 1 BL
Thor dies, and BL has 40%HP left if Thor uses missiles.
BL dies, and Thor has like a few HP, if Thor uses punisher cannon.
|
On December 08 2012 14:42 ZjiublingZ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 14:39 Acritter wrote:On December 08 2012 14:33 ZjiublingZ wrote:On December 08 2012 14:25 Acritter wrote:On December 08 2012 14:17 ZjiublingZ wrote:On December 08 2012 14:11 Acritter wrote:On December 08 2012 13:56 ZjiublingZ wrote:On December 08 2012 13:39 Acritter wrote:
What I don't understand about it is the overlap with Vikings. Merged upgrades gives pretty much no reason to not just build the damn Vikings. The Broods can't hit 'em. Yeah, they have to deal with Corruptors and Infestors, but that's just not quite the same. If I had to guess? It's because Thors are becoming less useful in HotS, while other races air units are becoming stronger. What with the Widow Mine providing another anti-air option for Mech, Thors being pretty bad against almost every Protoss air unit (even with the bonus damage vs Phoenix and Oracles, I personally would prefer to have Vikings against at least the Oracles because of their mobility). And Protoss air units only getting considerably stronger (except the Tempest). Not to mention in vs Zerg Swarm Hosts can really force the T away from making any more than 2-3 Thors, the same is true for Roach/Hydra. Honestly I don't see Thors being a very common unit to make with or without this buff, might as well give them this extra utility. Not to mention it puts in place an attack they can buff if they decide to alter the Mech + Air shared upgrades - because this could very well be too strong. I guess that might be it. I'd like to see a more complete Thor redesign in that case, though. Maybe as a kind of anti-Archon unit, because that seems like what Mech struggles with. lol Thors basically are an anti-Archon unit. They trade with them SO well. But I understand your point - the unit doesn't feel totally fitting compared to many other units, especially in the Mech composition. I think we should really see how things shake out though first before we conclude they should be scrapped. It isn't as if players are going to make 0 Thors in any match-up. ZvT for obvious reasons, ZvP they are still good to have a few of in a maxed army because of their HP and blocking ability, and still having good DPS. In TvT they are pretty meh, but can be useful for defending from air switches when you lack the appropriate Starport production (same goes for vs Protoss and Zerg). Going for a redesign of them would be pretty bold and it's hard to think of the effects it could have on every match-up. It's about how FAST they trade with Archons. Archons aren't good against mech because they do a ton of damage. That's the job of Zealots and Immortals. They're good because they soak up immense amounts of damage. Ever since BW, mech has always been a glass cannon strategy. You pray that your Tanks and Vultures can do enough damage before the enemy closes in, because once they do you're in serious trouble. Thors are bulky and as such trade excellently against Archons, but that's not what they need to win the battle. I totally agree, Archons are pretty good vs Mech because of their non-armored type and high hit points. Still, they aren't that scary by any means and I don't think it's something that Mech needs a better counter for, not at all. Even with their new bonus damage against Battle-Hellions. Archons are really used just because they are the best gas dump in the mineral heavy anti-Mech Protoss composition of Immortal/Chargelot (and they of course are made from HT who are fairly useful vs Mech). Thors got a big buff vs Templar tech by the energy removal anyways. Once again, I think it's extremely premature to say Thors should be redesigned - especially as an anti-Archon unit. They may end up being quite strong as Mech vs Protoss as is. Perhaps. I'm still just really unexcited about where the Thor currently is. It just doesn't seem to offer as much to the game as it ought to. I can understand that sentiment for sure, but we will have to see how much it does indeed offer to the game once things really pan out.
Perhaps. They're so anti-micro it bugs me, though.
|
now the question on my mind is does this ability work on collosi?
if it doesn't then it really should
|
On December 08 2012 14:49 larse wrote:
1 Thor vs 1 BL
Thor dies, and BL has 40%HP left if Thor uses missiles.
BL dies, and Thor has like a few HP, if Thor uses punisher cannon.
then perhaps the best way to change the BL is to decrease the range from 9.5 to 9
and/or increase the supply cost of the morph to 4
|
You know, while I would say the new ability is useful - certainly to the extent where pros could utilize it against massive air units - I don't think it's necessarily well designed, or at all exciting. It just feels kind of rushed, as if blizzard needed a quick way to show that it recognized the community's constenation at the uselessness of strike cannons and the energy bar, which made hts counter mech far too readily.
Blizzard should just retool the ability to be more like what strike cannons ought to have been ideally: a mode which, when toggled on, makes the Thor immobile but more powerful. Perhaps by buffing the damage output in HIP mode, making the Thor immobile like a sieged tank, but then increasing the thor's speed slightly when not in HIP mode.
|
On December 08 2012 13:12 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 11:36 SirPinky wrote:On December 08 2012 11:26 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
This should really go into simple questions and answers
High Impact Payload attacks 50% faster
It does better against units with high armor (like Carrier)
It also is better to use High Impact Payload if you are behind in upgrades (unlikely, but possible if you're behind)
I've done lots of tests with huge army sizes with T and P deathballs (thors tanks BCs ravens, carriers voidrays colossi stalkers), and with just basic spreading (only a second spent splitting, so it's doable any time in a real game), the High Impact Payload kept coming out with a noticeable advantage, despite how much clumping there still was.
Perhaps you might want half your thors in explosive, half in high impact, to make him worry about not clumping his units, and maybe it is better if you target fire with the explosive thors to parts of the army that clump a lot. It could be cool seeing this kind of decision making. This does not belong in simple question simple answer. Please get off your high horse. One does splash the other does not - both do similar damage with HIP having less cooldown. So is +1 cooldown better than splash, not to mention if light units are involved in a engagement is it worth the risk even having the cannon activated. This is far more technical than many of you are letting on. It's as simple as testing it out in a unit tester yourself, and seeing the results. Many of the questions asked in Simple questions and answers are like that. "Does X beat Y with this in this situation" Also, even David Kim explained that the purpose was for it to do better against armored air units. That pretty much answers the thread. He didn't say it directly but the meaning is implied Show nested quote +As such, we’ve given the Thor a new weapon that can be swapped with its anti-light, AoE weapon when it may be more useful for a particular situation. What isn't anti-light and AOE is a weapon that is better against non-light (basically, armored) units and has no AOE. Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 11:27 GattAttack wrote:
Wouldn't HIP scale much better into the late game as opposed to the javelin? In the early game where armour values are small, of course having the splash anti-air will be more useful (and it's more geared towards mid game units like mutalisks anyway), but as your enemy gains more armour upgrades and beefier units the javelin becomes quite pitiful.
What I'm trying to say is that the way the upgrades for the javelin work are +1 * 4, so actually for every weapon upgrade you get, your opponent getting an armour upgrade makes it a moot point. However for the HIP you just get a flat +4 damage, so for equal upgrades you're getting 3 extra damage. Including the increase in the weapon speed, this will make thor's anti-air scale incredibly well against armoured targets, something that mech really needed as the javelin becomes rather terrible against late game armies (and the thor is supposed to be a late game unit!).
Overall perhaps the numbers will need to change, but the tradeoff of increased DPS and scalability for splash seems really interesting and will lead to a lot more player experimentation with the thor. Which is pretty cool. They increase by 4? wow, then yes you're right
The only way to test this late game with two people playing - not a test map. Similar to what Idra and WhiteRa did today with PvZ. Two GM's including myself and Availo have mentioned we think this skill is lacking or useless most of the time. The greatest increase in the Thor's ability (this patch) is the elimination of energy, which makes them immune to feedback. I'm not arguing that the Thor is weak, I'm just questioning how this skill is any different from strike cannon during gameplay - I see the two as synonymous as not impacting the results of the game. Please don't respond to this post because you obviously take anything David Kim says at face value instead of truly testing it. I see this skill as one of the most prolific and interesting one of the upgrades, yet you dismiss it with simple DPS comparison as saying its a "improvement" without using logic, micro, and unit composition to guide your assumptions. To think you would relegate this question to something as a topic of "simple questions simple answers" is laughable. This is really a post about Thor splash damage impact versus direct damage (both with similar DPS but cooldown varying). We all know what the ability does. The question is...what is its usefulness.
Start posting replays on this and see how it turns out. I will soon.
|
On December 08 2012 16:22 Zergrusher wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 14:49 larse wrote:
1 Thor vs 1 BL
Thor dies, and BL has 40%HP left if Thor uses missiles.
BL dies, and Thor has like a few HP, if Thor uses punisher cannon. then perhaps the best way to change the BL is to decrease the range from 9.5 to 9 and/or increase the supply cost of the morph to 4
Why? Thor wins
|
On December 08 2012 16:51 larse wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 16:22 Zergrusher wrote:On December 08 2012 14:49 larse wrote:
1 Thor vs 1 BL
Thor dies, and BL has 40%HP left if Thor uses missiles.
BL dies, and Thor has like a few HP, if Thor uses punisher cannon. then perhaps the best way to change the BL is to decrease the range from 9.5 to 9 and/or increase the supply cost of the morph to 4 Why? Thor wins
No. Thor wins both ways. It has 40% hp left after using Punisher cannon. This kid is trolling or mispoke.
|
On December 08 2012 16:48 SirPinky wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 13:12 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:On December 08 2012 11:36 SirPinky wrote:On December 08 2012 11:26 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
This should really go into simple questions and answers
High Impact Payload attacks 50% faster
It does better against units with high armor (like Carrier)
It also is better to use High Impact Payload if you are behind in upgrades (unlikely, but possible if you're behind)
I've done lots of tests with huge army sizes with T and P deathballs (thors tanks BCs ravens, carriers voidrays colossi stalkers), and with just basic spreading (only a second spent splitting, so it's doable any time in a real game), the High Impact Payload kept coming out with a noticeable advantage, despite how much clumping there still was.
Perhaps you might want half your thors in explosive, half in high impact, to make him worry about not clumping his units, and maybe it is better if you target fire with the explosive thors to parts of the army that clump a lot. It could be cool seeing this kind of decision making. This does not belong in simple question simple answer. Please get off your high horse. One does splash the other does not - both do similar damage with HIP having less cooldown. So is +1 cooldown better than splash, not to mention if light units are involved in a engagement is it worth the risk even having the cannon activated. This is far more technical than many of you are letting on. It's as simple as testing it out in a unit tester yourself, and seeing the results. Many of the questions asked in Simple questions and answers are like that. "Does X beat Y with this in this situation" Also, even David Kim explained that the purpose was for it to do better against armored air units. That pretty much answers the thread. He didn't say it directly but the meaning is implied As such, we’ve given the Thor a new weapon that can be swapped with its anti-light, AoE weapon when it may be more useful for a particular situation. What isn't anti-light and AOE is a weapon that is better against non-light (basically, armored) units and has no AOE. On December 08 2012 11:27 GattAttack wrote:
Wouldn't HIP scale much better into the late game as opposed to the javelin? In the early game where armour values are small, of course having the splash anti-air will be more useful (and it's more geared towards mid game units like mutalisks anyway), but as your enemy gains more armour upgrades and beefier units the javelin becomes quite pitiful.
What I'm trying to say is that the way the upgrades for the javelin work are +1 * 4, so actually for every weapon upgrade you get, your opponent getting an armour upgrade makes it a moot point. However for the HIP you just get a flat +4 damage, so for equal upgrades you're getting 3 extra damage. Including the increase in the weapon speed, this will make thor's anti-air scale incredibly well against armoured targets, something that mech really needed as the javelin becomes rather terrible against late game armies (and the thor is supposed to be a late game unit!).
Overall perhaps the numbers will need to change, but the tradeoff of increased DPS and scalability for splash seems really interesting and will lead to a lot more player experimentation with the thor. Which is pretty cool. They increase by 4? wow, then yes you're right The only way to test this late game is with two people playing - not a test map. Similar to what Idra and WhiteRa did today with PvZ. Two GM's including myself and Availo have mentioned we think this skill is lacking or useless most of the time. The greatest increase in the Thor's ability (this patch) is the elimination of energy, which makes them immune to feedback. I'm not arguing that the Thor is weak, I'm just questioning how this skill is any different from strike cannon during gameplay - I see the two as synonymous and not impacting the results of the game. Please don't respond to this post because you obviously take anything David Kim says at face value instead of truly testing it. I see this skill as one of the most prolific and interesting one of the upgrades, yet you dismiss it with simple DPS comparison as saying its a "improvement" without using logic, micro, and unit composition to guide your assumptions. To think you would relegate this question to something as a topic of "simple questions simple answers" is laughable. This is really a post about Thor splash damage impact versus direct damage (both with similar DPS but cooldown varying). We all know what the ability does. The question is...what is its usefulness. Start posting replays on this and see how it turns out. I will soon.
|
On December 08 2012 16:51 larse wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 16:22 Zergrusher wrote:On December 08 2012 14:49 larse wrote:
1 Thor vs 1 BL
Thor dies, and BL has 40%HP left if Thor uses missiles.
BL dies, and Thor has like a few HP, if Thor uses punisher cannon. then perhaps the best way to change the BL is to decrease the range from 9.5 to 9 and/or increase the supply cost of the morph to 4 Why? Thor wins
well i ment about the BL in general from a balance persective lol.
anyways I really hope this ability can be used against the Collossi
|
This is so simple, I'm not sure why this thread is four pages long.
1) HIP has a shorter attack rate, and therefore has higher DPS.
2) HIP is not split into four separate attacks, and is therefore less affected by armor.
HIP does better against non-light units than EP, no questions asked.
|
Hip I assume will also better scale with upgrades
|
On December 08 2012 17:38 Cuce wrote:
Hip I assume will also better scale with upgrades
I hope so aswell
and has anyone tested if it works on War of the worlds?
|
On December 08 2012 10:51 eviltomahawk wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 10:45 RenZan wrote:
with the javelin missile you have to count 4 times the armor of the ennemy air unit. So if you target one big unit like broodlord for exemple the high impact payload do more damage. This is correct. Because the missiles deal damage separated into 4 missiles, armor deductions are counted 4 times. So assuming the target has 1 armor, each of the 6 damage missiles will have its damage reduced to 5, which makes the total damage only 20 instead of 24. With the cannons, the armor deduction is only counted once for the one instance of damage, so the 24 damage is only reduced to 23. Plus, the cannons have a cooldown of 2 seconds as opposed to the 3 second cooldown that the missiles have, so the cannons end up firing faster. Using the cannons, one Thor will beat one Broodlord. Using missiles, the Thor loses.
The thing is that its not "1 Thor vs. 1 Broodlord" but rather several of them against each other and the relatively bad mobility of the Thor, the Broodlings blocking the way and possibly other limitations on ground mobility due to choke points and such the Broodlords will still have the advantage in larger numbers.
On December 08 2012 16:48 SirPinky wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 13:12 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:On December 08 2012 11:36 SirPinky wrote:On December 08 2012 11:26 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
This should really go into simple questions and answers
High Impact Payload attacks 50% faster
It does better against units with high armor (like Carrier)
It also is better to use High Impact Payload if you are behind in upgrades (unlikely, but possible if you're behind)
I've done lots of tests with huge army sizes with T and P deathballs (thors tanks BCs ravens, carriers voidrays colossi stalkers), and with just basic spreading (only a second spent splitting, so it's doable any time in a real game), the High Impact Payload kept coming out with a noticeable advantage, despite how much clumping there still was.
Perhaps you might want half your thors in explosive, half in high impact, to make him worry about not clumping his units, and maybe it is better if you target fire with the explosive thors to parts of the army that clump a lot. It could be cool seeing this kind of decision making. This does not belong in simple question simple answer. Please get off your high horse. One does splash the other does not - both do similar damage with HIP having less cooldown. So is +1 cooldown better than splash, not to mention if light units are involved in a engagement is it worth the risk even having the cannon activated. This is far more technical than many of you are letting on. It's as simple as testing it out in a unit tester yourself, and seeing the results. Many of the questions asked in Simple questions and answers are like that. "Does X beat Y with this in this situation" Also, even David Kim explained that the purpose was for it to do better against armored air units. That pretty much answers the thread. He didn't say it directly but the meaning is implied As such, we’ve given the Thor a new weapon that can be swapped with its anti-light, AoE weapon when it may be more useful for a particular situation. What isn't anti-light and AOE is a weapon that is better against non-light (basically, armored) units and has no AOE. On December 08 2012 11:27 GattAttack wrote:
Wouldn't HIP scale much better into the late game as opposed to the javelin? In the early game where armour values are small, of course having the splash anti-air will be more useful (and it's more geared towards mid game units like mutalisks anyway), but as your enemy gains more armour upgrades and beefier units the javelin becomes quite pitiful.
What I'm trying to say is that the way the upgrades for the javelin work are +1 * 4, so actually for every weapon upgrade you get, your opponent getting an armour upgrade makes it a moot point. However for the HIP you just get a flat +4 damage, so for equal upgrades you're getting 3 extra damage. Including the increase in the weapon speed, this will make thor's anti-air scale incredibly well against armoured targets, something that mech really needed as the javelin becomes rather terrible against late game armies (and the thor is supposed to be a late game unit!).
Overall perhaps the numbers will need to change, but the tradeoff of increased DPS and scalability for splash seems really interesting and will lead to a lot more player experimentation with the thor. Which is pretty cool. They increase by 4? wow, then yes you're right The only way to test this late game with two people playing - not a test map. Similar to what Idra and WhiteRa did today with PvZ. Two GM's including myself and Availo have mentioned we think this skill is lacking or useless most of the time. The greatest increase in the Thor's ability (this patch) is the elimination of energy, which makes them immune to feedback. I'm not arguing that the Thor is weak, I'm just questioning how this skill is any different from strike cannon during gameplay - I see the two as synonymous as not impacting the results of the game. Please don't respond to this post because you obviously take anything David Kim says at face value instead of truly testing it. I see this skill as one of the most prolific and interesting one of the upgrades, yet you dismiss it with simple DPS comparison as saying its a "improvement" without using logic, micro, and unit composition to guide your assumptions. To think you would relegate this question to something as a topic of "simple questions simple answers" is laughable. This is really a post about Thor splash damage impact versus direct damage (both with similar DPS but cooldown varying). We all know what the ability does. The question is...what is its usefulness. Start posting replays on this and see how it turns out. I will soon.
This plus the size reduction IMO.
|
The normal mode has 8 dps (6.66 vs 1 armor, 5.33 vs 2 armor) vs armored targets. The new mode has 12 dps (11.5 vs 1 armor, 11 vs 2 armor). So you should pretty much always use the old mode when you can hit atleast 2 targets or light armored targets. Guess you shouldn't use the new mode unless you are behind on upgrades.
I hope the new mode gets buffed a bit.
|
On December 08 2012 17:04 Crawdad wrote:
This is so simple, I'm not sure why this thread is four pages long.
1) HIP has a shorter attack rate, and therefore has higher DPS.
2) HIP is not split into four separate attacks, and is therefore less affected by armor.
HIP does better against non-light units than EP, no questions asked.
I'm so close to being done with this post b/c people like you. Please read the rest of the 4 pages before you comment. There is a reason for splash and its effectiveness. Please do not comment on this post unless you play Terran, are masters or higher and have the BETA. Thank you!
|
On December 08 2012 18:05 SirPinky wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 17:04 Crawdad wrote:
This is so simple, I'm not sure why this thread is four pages long.
1) HIP has a shorter attack rate, and therefore has higher DPS.
2) HIP is not split into four separate attacks, and is therefore less affected by armor.
HIP does better against non-light units than EP, no questions asked. I'm so close to being done with this post b/c people like you. Please read the rest of the 4 pages before you comment. There is a reason for splash and its effectiveness. Please do not comment on this post unless you play Terran, are masters or higher and have the BETA. Thank you!
Tbh you are pretty much the only one who cant see the obvious. Thors normal splash is very small, it only works against really clumped up units. I could give you an example how enormously better 3/3 thors with HIP would be against 3/3 carriers than thors with javs, but you would then only rage at me. (We are talking about way more than twice the dps, uncreative troll should take native resistances into account, and also upgrade scaling).
Or glaringly obvious situations like you are walking around with a smallish mech army, bunch of hellbats, siege tanks, and 2-3 thors, and suddenly you find out your toss opponent managed to make some voids unscouted. Since we arent talking about 20 voids they wont clump up noticable, and AOE damage is fairly insignificant. But you are welcome to just stick to javs.
|
I think it´s pretty obvious it´s going to be buffed in a while so it becomes more viable
|
I still believe that in this mode the Thor should become like a stationary Turret, with high DPS (antiair ofc). This is enabled by the positioning ability of the mech army. This mean the Thor can't move, but his Damage his increased a lot.
|
On December 08 2012 18:10 Sissors wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 18:05 SirPinky wrote:On December 08 2012 17:04 Crawdad wrote:
This is so simple, I'm not sure why this thread is four pages long.
1) HIP has a shorter attack rate, and therefore has higher DPS.
2) HIP is not split into four separate attacks, and is therefore less affected by armor.
HIP does better against non-light units than EP, no questions asked. I'm so close to being done with this post b/c people like you. Please read the rest of the 4 pages before you comment. There is a reason for splash and its effectiveness. Please do not comment on this post unless you play Terran, are masters or higher and have the BETA. Thank you! Tbh you are pretty much the only one who cant see the obvious. Thors normal splash is very small, it only works against really clumped up units. I could give you an example how enormously better 3/3 thors with HIP would be against 3/3 carriers than thors with javs, but you would then only rage at me. (We are talking about way more than twice the dps, uncreative troll should take native resistances into account, and also upgrade scaling). Or glaringly obvious situations like you are walking around with a smallish mech army, bunch of hellbats, siege tanks, and 2-3 thors, and suddenly you find out your toss opponent managed to make some voids unscouted. Since we arent talking about 20 voids they wont clump up noticable, and AOE damage is fairly insignificant. But you are welcome to just stick to javs.
And again, you are a perfect example of a person who obviously did not read the rest of the posts. I conceded units like BC and mid-size carrier armies are worse against HIP than Javelin missles. But, for the most part, this is not how Blizzard presents this weapon - better versus "mostly air" armies. It is no better versus units like BL or other mid-size (non-light) units - in fact worse because it doesn't splash clumped up corruptors/phoenix etc. At critical mass air (such as carriers) this weapon is useless. Sounds like myself and Availo are the only people that actually see this ability as useless. As GM I don't post many unfounded complaints unless it is blaringly obvious. I urge the next person to disprove me via replays. Thank you.
Edit: And this has nothing to do with the Thor's strength - it is very strong in its current state (imo). This is just a statement "what the hell is this ability supposed to be used for." Thank you for the elimination of the energy component - I'm content with that....
|
The better question is whether or not Blizzard is going to buff it a little bit. It is not that much of an improvement on non-light air units at the moment, especially against two keys units - Broodlords and Void Rays which are both going to be seen a lot in HOTS. I've had big groups of thors melt to both of these units with HIP on.
|
On December 08 2012 18:23 HyDrA_solic wrote:
I still believe that in this mode the Thor should become like a stationary Turret, with high DPS (antiair ofc). This is enabled by the positioning ability of the mech army. This mean the Thor can't move, but his Damage his increased a lot.
Nice idea. The conversion time would have to be thought out though. It would have to be longer than 4 seconds to be in defensive mode, but it could work. I dont see it working in a offensive engagement because it would be too versitile. Nobody wants to see mass thors (even as a Terran I concede that).
|
On December 08 2012 18:30 Scila wrote:
The better question is whether or not Blizzard is going to buff it a little bit. It is not that much of an improvement on non-light air units at the moment, especially against two keys units - Broodlords and Void Rays which are both going to be seen a lot in HOTS. I've had big groups of thors melt to both of these units with HIP on.
I too have had them melt. I fear this new ability will just fall by the waste side like strike cannon. But I do not want it too: I think this concept is a good idea, it just needs some tweaking. When it first came out I thought this conversion reduced Thor light damage in place for max single unit damage. So, for instance, HIP becomes 50-60 dmg flat (no splash) and can only hit air, when converted back it is the standard thor in WoL. I thought that concept was a interesting idea until I saw what Blizzard had really rolled out.
|
im pretty sure it will be buffed. the idea itself is good design-wise, but the damage right now is ridiculous, especially compared to the over-the-top animation of the morphing and the attack
AAAAND THE THOR BRINGS OUT THE BIG GUNS... to do the same damange :o
its even worse than tempest, which also, right now, has an over-the-top attack animation doing actually little damage
possible buffs would be just to buff dps, or buff dps even more in return for making thors stationary when using it, or just bring back the old 250mm and let them hit air
with air/ground upgrades shared its prolly not even necessary to make the thor so good anti-air, it will just overlap with vikings. so instead im all for making the thor:
-stronger
-slower
-more expensive
-give it at least one more ability
to turn it into a non-massable high damage versatile support unit for mech. the versatility of different "transformer-forms" and the micro-effort for these will offset its clunkyness
i could even imagine making the thor really good but limiting the amount of thors you can have, a la MsC
|
On December 08 2012 11:20 SarcasmMonster wrote:
Since Blizz combined the mech & air upgrades, I don't think the Thor needs to be an exceptional anti-air unit.
I'm with this guy.
I think the HIP Cannons make the Thor a more useful anti-air unit vs larger enemies (if only slightly)due to the armor issue but I don't think they're meant to completely invalidate Vikings especially now that Vikings are so much more accessible with shared upgrades.
At the end of the day too regardless of how effective 250cannons are, there's 2 points that can't really be argued against.
1. HIP is fucking cool. Seeing Thors walking around with giant cannons on their shoulders is AWESOME.
2. Thors lost their energy bar. Which means HTs can't feedback them anymore. That alone is a huge plus with the new system.
|
On December 08 2012 18:48 Vindicare605 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 11:20 SarcasmMonster wrote:
Since Blizz combined the mech & air upgrades, I don't think the Thor needs to be an exceptional anti-air unit. I'm with this guy. I think the HIP Cannons make the Thor a more useful anti-air unit vs larger enemies (if only slightly)due to the armor issue but I don't think they're meant to completely invalidate Vikings especially now that Vikings are so much more accessible with shared upgrades. At the end of the day too regardless of how effective 250cannons are, there's 2 points that can't really be argued against. 1. HIP is fucking cool. Seeing Thors walking around with giant cannons on their shoulders is AWESOME. 2. Thors lost their energy bar. Which means HTs can't feedback them anymore. That alone is a huge plus with the new system.
Vikings REALLY are a terrible concept, because they become pretty much useless the moment when all air opponents are dead. This is a fate they share with the Corruptor, except the Corruptor still has a moderately useful but annoying to use spell. Landing Vikings and using them as cannon fodder is a waste IMO unless you are on the brink of winning, since they cost a lot of gas to reproduce and if the Zerg/Protoss goes for a full size ground army (without Colossi) their usefulness is at an end.
Giving a "looks cool" as a reason for thinking the change is great is simply typical for this time. Its all about the looks and not the content. The change for HIP is nice, but the Thor is still terrible as AA when compared to the Goliath and its relationship with the Guardian. Since Blizzard has reduced the size of the Thor as well it seems they try to make it more like the Goliath, but its not enough. [I wonder if they reduced the size of the Odin in the campaign as well, hehe.]
|
Just to make it clear:
vs an air unit with 1 starting armor (Medivac, Overseer, Viper, Broodlord, MSCore) and a 0/0 Thor
After 6 seconds:
New Attack will have fired 4 times (first attack is instant) with 24-1 damage => 92 damage
Old Attack will have fired 3 times with 4x(6-1) damage => 60 damage + splash
However Corruptor, Tempest, Carrier, Mothership, Battlecruiser have 2 or even 3 starting armor, making the new attack superior against those units (especiallys since they are quite big and don't stack as much as other units).
Damage would be 88 damage vs 48+splash against 2 armor and
84 damage vs 36+splash against 3 armor.
Also the new attack gets +2 per upgrade, which leaves 1 point of extra damage while the old attack gets only +1, which gets absorbed by getting armor upgrades.
Armored air units with 0 starting armor (Overlord, Viking, Voidray) could be targeted by both attacks. Since the new one fires faster it will kill small numbers more quickly, but against bigger numbers additional splash would be useful.
|
I just tested various encounters with broodlords and thors with 2 or 3 BF-Hellbats the Thors are coming out ahead with HI while loosing with javelin. I mean HI is not the answer to all questions for mech, but it surely smoothes encouters in favor to the terran. HIR gives an option to not die that hard to certain things. Its not to counter things imho.
This is the small scale battle i tested: 4 BL vs 3 thors and 2 Hellbats. BL fokus fired the thors and vice versa, with full upgrades on both sides. With javelins 2 BL's remain, with HIR 2 Thors remain. I dont know how it fares and sclaes in bigger battles, but it doesnt look that useless to me.
|
On December 08 2012 23:11 Knalldi wrote:
I just tested various encounters with broodlords and thors with 2 or 3 BF-Hellbats the Thors are coming out ahead with HI while loosing with javelin. I mean HI is not the answer to all questions for mech, but it surely smoothes encouters in favor to the terran. HIR gives an option to not die that hard to certain things. Its not to counter things imho.
This is the small scale battle i tested: 4 BL vs 3 thors and 2 Hellbats. BL fokus fired the thors and vice versa, with full upgrades on both sides. With javelins 2 BL's remain, with HIR 2 Thors remain. I dont know how it fares and sclaes in bigger battles, but it doesnt look that useless to me.
Was this with 3/3 for both? Also 4 BL are only 16 Supply, while 3 Thors and 2 Hellbats are 22 Supply, since they will likely meet in late game, full upgrades + using supply to compare is closer to a real game. Of course in a real game you don't have just BL vs just Thor+HBs
From what i can tell Thor's new attack does 27 (24+6-3) every 2 seconds, so 9 attacks to kill or 16 seconds (first attack is instant). Javelins its 4*6 (6+3-3) for 24 damage every 3 seconds, so 10 attacks to kill or 27 seconds. Seems a big difference to me, 3 BL vs 2 Thor is equal supply, even with the Javelins hitting 2 BLs with every attack its takes 21 seconds for them to kill all 3 (5 attacks take 12 seconds and splash kills a BL, remaining 2 BL take 3 more attacks with splash hitting them so 9 more seconds) compared to 16 seconds to kill 2 BL, and then 10 more to kill the last BL for 26 seconds. Now how likely is it for Javelins to hit 2 BL with every attack for 21 seconds with micro + deaths creating space between the BLs.
|
United Arab Emirates439 Posts
On December 08 2012 18:25 SirPinky wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 18:10 Sissors wrote:On December 08 2012 18:05 SirPinky wrote:On December 08 2012 17:04 Crawdad wrote:
This is so simple, I'm not sure why this thread is four pages long.
1) HIP has a shorter attack rate, and therefore has higher DPS.
2) HIP is not split into four separate attacks, and is therefore less affected by armor.
HIP does better against non-light units than EP, no questions asked. I'm so close to being done with this post b/c people like you. Please read the rest of the 4 pages before you comment. There is a reason for splash and its effectiveness. Please do not comment on this post unless you play Terran, are masters or higher and have the BETA. Thank you! Tbh you are pretty much the only one who cant see the obvious. Thors normal splash is very small, it only works against really clumped up units. I could give you an example how enormously better 3/3 thors with HIP would be against 3/3 carriers than thors with javs, but you would then only rage at me. (We are talking about way more than twice the dps, uncreative troll should take native resistances into account, and also upgrade scaling). Or glaringly obvious situations like you are walking around with a smallish mech army, bunch of hellbats, siege tanks, and 2-3 thors, and suddenly you find out your toss opponent managed to make some voids unscouted. Since we arent talking about 20 voids they wont clump up noticable, and AOE damage is fairly insignificant. But you are welcome to just stick to javs. And again, you are a perfect example of a person who obviously did not read the rest of the posts. I conceded units like BC and mid-size carrier armies are worse against HIP than Javelin missles. But, for the most part, this is not how Blizzard presents this weapon - better versus "mostly air" armies. It is no better versus units like BL or other mid-size (non-light) units - in fact worse because it doesn't splash clumped up corruptors/phoenix etc. At critical mass air (such as carriers) this weapon is useless. Sounds like myself and Availo are the only people that actually see this ability as useless. As GM I don't post many unfounded complaints unless it is blaringly obvious. I urge the next person to disprove me via replays. Thank you. Edit: And this has nothing to do with the Thor's strength - it is very strong in its current state (imo). This is just a statement "what the hell is this ability supposed to be used for." Thank you for the elimination of the energy component - I'm content with that....
There is no point in saying this ability is useless. I agree, the splash attack is going to be useful in the majority of situations. Namely, vs light units and against larger air armies because of splash (except perhaps large BC armies as it's very easy to keep them from clumping). You claim Blizzard presents this weapon as better against "mostly air" armies... where did they say that?
This is what DK said in the Thoughts on Balance post: "we felt that Factory units could use a more standard anti air attack. As such, we’ve given the Thor a new weapon that can be swapped with its anti-light, AoE weapon when it may be more useful for a particular situation."
And that's exactly what this attack does.
I have no idea how you can say it's going to be like the Strike Cannon and be useless. It isn't an upgrade and there are some situations where it is clearly better. Namely vs low numbers of units like Void Rays, Brood Lords, Tempests, Carriers, BC's. Nobody needs to upload a replay to support this, it's very simple math.
|
Was this with 3/3 for both? Also 4 BL are only 16 Supply, while 3 Thors and 2 Hellbats are 22 Supply, since they will likely meet in late game, full upgrades + using supply to compare is closer to a real game. Of course in a real game you don't have just BL vs just Thor+HBs
I went for a ressource comparison there, but I guess supply comparison is better. But these unit testers and theorycrafting can only do so much. I think HIR have possibilities, and only extensive in game testing can prove them good or bad. Theorycrafting is not the way to prove or disprove anything imho.
|
On December 08 2012 21:56 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 18:48 Vindicare605 wrote:On December 08 2012 11:20 SarcasmMonster wrote:
Since Blizz combined the mech & air upgrades, I don't think the Thor needs to be an exceptional anti-air unit. I'm with this guy. I think the HIP Cannons make the Thor a more useful anti-air unit vs larger enemies (if only slightly)due to the armor issue but I don't think they're meant to completely invalidate Vikings especially now that Vikings are so much more accessible with shared upgrades. At the end of the day too regardless of how effective 250cannons are, there's 2 points that can't really be argued against. 1. HIP is fucking cool. Seeing Thors walking around with giant cannons on their shoulders is AWESOME. 2. Thors lost their energy bar. Which means HTs can't feedback them anymore. That alone is a huge plus with the new system. Vikings REALLY are a terrible concept, because they become pretty much useless the moment when all air opponents are dead. This is a fate they share with the Corruptor, except the Corruptor still has a moderately useful but annoying to use spell. Landing Vikings and using them as cannon fodder is a waste IMO unless you are on the brink of winning, since they cost a lot of gas to reproduce and if the Zerg/Protoss goes for a full size ground army (without Colossi) their usefulness is at an end. Giving a "looks cool" as a reason for thinking the change is great is simply typical for this time. Its all about the looks and not the content. The change for HIP is nice, but the Thor is still terrible as AA when compared to the Goliath and its relationship with the Guardian. Since Blizzard has reduced the size of the Thor as well it seems they try to make it more like the Goliath, but its not enough. [I wonder if they reduced the size of the Odin in the campaign as well, hehe.]
Vikings are a lot better now then before anyway. On equal UPs they actually kill Roaches for supply.
I like the new Thor attack. Now you can build more then just Vikings for anti air. The only thing that i worry about is mass Thors, one of the ugliest compositions in the game IMO.
|
On December 08 2012 23:58 Knalldi wrote:Show nested quote +Was this with 3/3 for both? Also 4 BL are only 16 Supply, while 3 Thors and 2 Hellbats are 22 Supply, since they will likely meet in late game, full upgrades + using supply to compare is closer to a real game. Of course in a real game you don't have just BL vs just Thor+HBs
I went for a ressource comparison there, but I guess supply comparison is better. But these unit testers and theorycrafting can only do so much. I think HIR have possibilities, and only extensive in game testing can prove them good or bad. Theorycrafting is not the way to prove or disprove anything imho.
I agree, unit testers + theorycrafting only help give an idea. Things can be amazing in theory but micro or even just getting to a certain mix of units without dying are almost impossible to properly test/theorycraft outside actual games.
|
On December 08 2012 22:29 Cruncher93 wrote:
Just to make it clear:
vs an air unit with 1 starting armor (Medivac, Overseer, Viper, Broodlord, MSCore) and a 0/0 Thor
After 6 seconds:
New Attack will have fired 4 times (first attack is instant) with 24-1 damage => 92 damage
Old Attack will have fired 3 times with 4x(6-1) damage => 60 damage + splash
However Corruptor, Tempest, Carrier, Mothership, Battlecruiser have 2 or even 3 starting armor, making the new attack superior against those units (especiallys since they are quite big and don't stack as much as other units).
Damage would be 88 damage vs 48+splash against 2 armor and
84 damage vs 36+splash against 3 armor.
Also the new attack gets +2 per upgrade, which leaves 1 point of extra damage while the old attack gets only +1, which gets absorbed by getting armor upgrades.
Armored air units with 0 starting armor (Overlord, Viking, Voidray) could be targeted by both attacks. Since the new one fires faster it will kill small numbers more quickly, but against bigger numbers additional splash would be useful.
Wow, first shot is instant? nice
|
On December 08 2012 21:56 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 18:48 Vindicare605 wrote:On December 08 2012 11:20 SarcasmMonster wrote:
Since Blizz combined the mech & air upgrades, I don't think the Thor needs to be an exceptional anti-air unit. I'm with this guy. I think the HIP Cannons make the Thor a more useful anti-air unit vs larger enemies (if only slightly)due to the armor issue but I don't think they're meant to completely invalidate Vikings especially now that Vikings are so much more accessible with shared upgrades. At the end of the day too regardless of how effective 250cannons are, there's 2 points that can't really be argued against. 1. HIP is fucking cool. Seeing Thors walking around with giant cannons on their shoulders is AWESOME. 2. Thors lost their energy bar. Which means HTs can't feedback them anymore. That alone is a huge plus with the new system. Vikings REALLY are a terrible concept, because they become pretty much useless the moment when all air opponents are dead. This is a fate they share with the Corruptor, except the Corruptor still has a moderately useful but annoying to use spell. Landing Vikings and using them as cannon fodder is a waste IMO unless you are on the brink of winning, since they cost a lot of gas to reproduce and if the Zerg/Protoss goes for a full size ground army (without Colossi) their usefulness is at an end. Giving a "looks cool" as a reason for thinking the change is great is simply typical for this time. Its all about the looks and not the content. The change for HIP is nice, but the Thor is still terrible as AA when compared to the Goliath and its relationship with the Guardian. Since Blizzard has reduced the size of the Thor as well it seems they try to make it more like the Goliath, but its not enough. [I wonder if they reduced the size of the Odin in the campaign as well, hehe.]
Vikings on the ground are pretty good if you can avoid anti armored ground damage. But they could actually tank if they would lose their armored status on the ground. But due to their air unit like hp on the ground they really get destroyed by anything that does + to armored. But without the armored flag, they would be really good against Immortals, because they are perfect at bringing down Immortal shields.
At the end it is perfect to go and harass with them, if they are no longer needed. But thats often way to much micro for a terran.
At the end the best composition against Air is the Thors and a few Vikings. They work so well together at bringing down air Units in a giant area.
|
On December 09 2012 00:41 FeyFey wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 21:56 Rabiator wrote:On December 08 2012 18:48 Vindicare605 wrote:On December 08 2012 11:20 SarcasmMonster wrote:
Since Blizz combined the mech & air upgrades, I don't think the Thor needs to be an exceptional anti-air unit. I'm with this guy. I think the HIP Cannons make the Thor a more useful anti-air unit vs larger enemies (if only slightly)due to the armor issue but I don't think they're meant to completely invalidate Vikings especially now that Vikings are so much more accessible with shared upgrades. At the end of the day too regardless of how effective 250cannons are, there's 2 points that can't really be argued against. 1. HIP is fucking cool. Seeing Thors walking around with giant cannons on their shoulders is AWESOME. 2. Thors lost their energy bar. Which means HTs can't feedback them anymore. That alone is a huge plus with the new system. Vikings REALLY are a terrible concept, because they become pretty much useless the moment when all air opponents are dead. This is a fate they share with the Corruptor, except the Corruptor still has a moderately useful but annoying to use spell. Landing Vikings and using them as cannon fodder is a waste IMO unless you are on the brink of winning, since they cost a lot of gas to reproduce and if the Zerg/Protoss goes for a full size ground army (without Colossi) their usefulness is at an end. Giving a "looks cool" as a reason for thinking the change is great is simply typical for this time. Its all about the looks and not the content. The change for HIP is nice, but the Thor is still terrible as AA when compared to the Goliath and its relationship with the Guardian. Since Blizzard has reduced the size of the Thor as well it seems they try to make it more like the Goliath, but its not enough. [I wonder if they reduced the size of the Odin in the campaign as well, hehe.] Vikings on the ground are pretty good if you can avoid anti armored ground damage. But they could actually tank if they would lose their armored status on the ground. But due to their air unit like hp on the ground they really get destroyed by anything that does + to armored. But without the armored flag, they would be really good against Immortals, because they are perfect at bringing down Immortal shields. At the end it is perfect to go and harass with them, if they are no longer needed. But thats often way to much micro for a terran. At the end the best composition against Air is the Thors and a few Vikings. They work so well together at bringing down air Units in a giant area.
I really thing that is what Blizzard is going for, to give players the ability to build several types of units to counter air units, rather than just build viking/Corruptor/stalker-blob. By giving the Thor passable(maybe not with the current stats, but with a slight buff), a terran is not hurt by getting them. Since vikings upgrade on the same tree, they can get a few vikings and back them up with thors/marines. Fewer viking blobs are great for the game.
|
On December 08 2012 23:49 Habitus wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 23:11 Knalldi wrote:
I just tested various encounters with broodlords and thors with 2 or 3 BF-Hellbats the Thors are coming out ahead with HI while loosing with javelin. I mean HI is not the answer to all questions for mech, but it surely smoothes encouters in favor to the terran. HIR gives an option to not die that hard to certain things. Its not to counter things imho.
This is the small scale battle i tested: 4 BL vs 3 thors and 2 Hellbats. BL fokus fired the thors and vice versa, with full upgrades on both sides. With javelins 2 BL's remain, with HIR 2 Thors remain. I dont know how it fares and sclaes in bigger battles, but it doesnt look that useless to me. Was this with 3/3 for both? Also 4 BL are only 16 Supply, while 3 Thors and 2 Hellbats are 22 Supply, since they will likely meet in late game, full upgrades + using supply to compare is closer to a real game. Of course in a real game you don't have just BL vs just Thor+HBs From what i can tell Thor's new attack does 27 (24+6-3) every 2 seconds, so 9 attacks to kill or 16 seconds (first attack is instant). Javelins its 4*6 (6+3-3) for 24 damage every 3 seconds, so 10 attacks to kill or 27 seconds. Seems a big difference to me, 3 BL vs 2 Thor is equal supply, even with the Javelins hitting 2 BLs with every attack its takes 21 seconds for them to kill all 3 (5 attacks take 12 seconds and splash kills a BL, remaining 2 BL take 3 more attacks with splash hitting them so 9 more seconds) compared to 16 seconds to kill 2 BL, and then 10 more to kill the last BL for 26 seconds. Now how likely is it for Javelins to hit 2 BL with every attack for 21 seconds with micro + deaths creating space between the BLs.
Just realised i forgot to include the BLs base 1 Armor, so its actually 26 every 2 seconds, so still 9 attacks/16 seconds for HIP, while its 4*5 with Javelins for 20 per 3 seconds or 12 attacks/33 seconds to kill now.
3 BL vs 2 Thor the Javelins become 6 attacks/15 seconds for splash, then 3 attacks/9 seconds for remaining 2 for 24 seconds totals. So 2 second reduction in TTK with Javelins compared to HIP if every Javelin attack hits 2 BL.
|
The point is that there is no more energy on the thor with a useless ability. terran still has vikings and with the combined upgrades, the thor transformation is now an option. i'm not sure how it will play out, but it definitely makes mech a little more viable in TvP because feedback doesn't counter thors anymore. Blizzard just wanted to make the cannons on their back cool again, and I think it's a great cover up for 250 mm cannons.
i also realized that a 3/3 mech army can be supplemented by 3/3 grounded vikings
|
Assuming equal upgrades, if you're fighting a unit with base armor, HIP essentially doubles your single-target DPS. Doubling your DPS is definitely going to be useful in some situations.
|
When I play I find that hellbats kill broodlings super fast while thors with HIP kill the actual BLs. Very effectively at that
|
I like the idea of HIP, but I think it may need a buff, because even the units it is best against tend to come in big clumps that make Javelin missiles better regardless. Raising the damage to 30 or so would give it a much more clear place. I think it should also be able to target Colossi who are out of the range of the Thor's ground attack.
|
High Impact should do 2x25 damage just like their ground attack and maybe they could throw grenades on the ground that do 8 damage in aoe or something.
|
I think the point of HIP is to prevent you from insta dieing to a few Air Units before you tech to Vikings. This is nice since a Meching Terran has to really watch where they allocate gas.
|
Even if this ability turns out to be situational. Can you really compain?
Pro
-Strike cannons where worse
-Energy is gone
-Additional single target damage
-looks cool
Cons
...
|
On December 10 2012 14:08 awesomoecalypse wrote:
I like the idea of HIP, but I think it may need a buff, because even the units it is best against tend to come in big clumps that make Javelin missiles better regardless. Raising the damage to 30 or so would give it a much more clear place. I think it should also be able to target Colossi who are out of the range of the Thor's ground attack.
It's fine I think. It's a noticeable buff against big armored targets like broodlords and carriers. It still doesn't make the thor good against armored air but it shouldn't be as otherwise the thor would just a be a stupid 'good against anything' unit which is not what you should want for a boring slow unit as it is.
The thor should just be a mech unit that is mostly made for countering light air while still being decent against other stuff which is exactly what it is now. Buffing it more could lead to heavy thor compositions which is quite possible even worse thane the mass broodlord style we see in WoL now..
|
On December 10 2012 22:49 weikor wrote:
Even if this ability turns out to be situational. Can you really compain?
Pro
-Strike cannons where worse
-Energy is gone
-Additional single target damage
-looks cool
Cons
...
Yeah i don't really get the complaint either. Thors not having an energy bar anymore and actually having an ability that does something is a massive buff considering they weren't that bad of a unit in the first place. They were bulky and very much ineffective vs non light air unit, now that the scale has been changed and they gained HIP with the combination of mech upgrades affecting air and ground i think they are pretty damn good, just not in a vacuum.
|
On December 10 2012 22:49 weikor wrote:
Even if this ability turns out to be situational. Can you really compain?
Pro
-Strike cannons where worse
-Energy is gone
-Additional single target damage
-looks cool
Cons
...
Well the cons might be ...
- its not a "click and something nifty happens" ability, so it is kinda not exciting,
- its not doing enough damage yet OR - if buffed - it could easily be too much damage. The Thor is 6 supply and should deal enough damage to be able to fight 1.5 Broodlords at 4 supply (if you just take the supply). Increasing the damage accordingly would probably be too much for such a high hit point unit. The BW Goliath was a much smaller "dose" and thus probably easier to balance against its counterparts.
Personally I would have liked the following change to the AA attack of the Thor best:
- The old splash attack is removed and replaced by 4 shots of X damage (no bonus damage restrictions) which hit separate targets - if avalable - OR a single target if only one is around OR the Thor is told to attack that unit. This would add a lot of decisions to the Thor, remove the abusive magic boxing (which made the Thor useless against the unit it was designed against) and allows for a relatively high amount of single target damage.
|
|
|
You could deal with Broodlords if you were ahead on upgrades with the Javelin already. The HIP removes this need to be ahead in upgrades as it is a single hit, the trade of is no splash. If they would make it considerably stronger, then someone that could already deal with Broodlords by using Javelines, would just rip Broodlords and that would deny this techtree completely.
If you don't know how to get past Broodlings with your Thors, you should probably rely on Vikings. It is quiet troubling to get them in range, but if you managed it the Broodlords will take losses. In TvZ you need many Thors anyway against a Broodlord Corruptor army, so it is quiet effective to still have a few Javelins out to focus clumps.
Anyway I think HIP is working fine. But it is not really smart to only rely on one fire mode. The best Anti Air combination for Terran is anyway Viking/Thor with Raven support. Especially since they share their upgrade snow. Of course it is always a matter of control.
I like that the Thors needs abit more decision making and that the micro against "capital ships" got a bit more rewarding.
|
In my honest opinion:
- HSM/Yamato needs to have splash to differentiate, and none of the Terran air units deal splash.
- Thor HIM is a start, but needs to be more functionally different to the Thor's current AA ability; maybe buff the damage and add a cool vulnerability(??) idk.
|
Did some testing of my own.
On December 11 2012 07:24 Came Norrection wrote:
HIP counters corrupters.
Depends purely on the situation, if you have corruptors not moving around with each other, just standing there still and shooting you will notice that they die faster with HIP.
However, as is often the case players do move their army around. Often for micro reasons and sometimes for slight misclicks. Since corruptors like many other units clump up even for small steps the javelin will often do more damage thanks to splash.
So in theory HIP will win but in reality the javelin work better against corruptors, in most cases at least.
But as I mentioned it depends on the situation. If you're up against a lot of corruptors I can guarantee that javelin will do more total damage. If it's just 5-7 units HIP will most likely be better but not with much.
I like this change. Now Thors will be a lot more viable against protoss and a great soft counter against brood lords. Vikings will always be the true counter against air units as terran but now Thors can be a great addition to the main army with HIP. I hope this change stays and I don't see a reason to buff the damage either atm but as everything else it will need more field testing.
|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
Has anyone actually managed to get HiP to actually work against broodlords in a game?
Every time I try it I suffer the same problem as before with the Thors bugging out on the broodlings and never attacking constantly.
|
IMO HIP is pretty decent against armor-type units but still prefer to use vikings to take those broodlords tempest carriers down than HIP. Now the upgrades for both Mech and Air units so vikings damage much more better when those heavy armor-types unit come out. HIP damage isn't really good against air and has no AoE, short range.
In TvZ: Few thors for defend muta early and support army later, however the core of mech army is still Helions and Sieged tanks. Zergs easily get rid of thors by switching to mass roaches and Ultralisks play.
In TvP: The best thing is Engery bar has gone ( Thanks Blizzard ), so that make thors much more stronger in this matchup with helions ghosts and few vikings.
|
|
|
The main difference of the High Impact Payload upgrade is that it deals 24 flat damage to air units, like how others before me have already explained. I think they made it this way so that Thors become more viable against small numbers of Brood Lords, while they work up to transition to Viking or Ravens.
|
On December 08 2012 21:56 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 18:48 Vindicare605 wrote:On December 08 2012 11:20 SarcasmMonster wrote:
Since Blizz combined the mech & air upgrades, I don't think the Thor needs to be an exceptional anti-air unit. I'm with this guy. I think the HIP Cannons make the Thor a more useful anti-air unit vs larger enemies (if only slightly)due to the armor issue but I don't think they're meant to completely invalidate Vikings especially now that Vikings are so much more accessible with shared upgrades. At the end of the day too regardless of how effective 250cannons are, there's 2 points that can't really be argued against. 1. HIP is fucking cool. Seeing Thors walking around with giant cannons on their shoulders is AWESOME. 2. Thors lost their energy bar. Which means HTs can't feedback them anymore. That alone is a huge plus with the new system. Vikings REALLY are a terrible concept, because they become pretty much useless the moment when all air opponents are dead. This is a fate they share with the Corruptor, except the Corruptor still has a moderately useful but annoying to use spell. Landing Vikings and using them as cannon fodder is a waste IMO unless you are on the brink of winning, since they cost a lot of gas to reproduce and if the Zerg/Protoss goes for a full size ground army (without Colossi) their usefulness is at an end. Giving a "looks cool" as a reason for thinking the change is great is simply typical for this time. Its all about the looks and not the content. The change for HIP is nice, but the Thor is still terrible as AA when compared to the Goliath and its relationship with the Guardian. Since Blizzard has reduced the size of the Thor as well it seems they try to make it more like the Goliath, but its not enough. [I wonder if they reduced the size of the Odin in the campaign as well, hehe.]
With the shared armory upgrades, the viking gets indirectly buffed. You can build a handful of vikings to help fight corruptors. Since in many cases you have starports anyway, you can get AA more quickly with producing thors at fax and vikings at the port.
|
On December 08 2012 11:22 doffe wrote:
so what are we discussing here? Obviously the 24damage one with 2s CD is better then the 6*4 damage one with 3s CD against broods since they ahve the same range?. Is this even a topic... Noone is claiming that its awsome and counter unit x w/e but that its better isnt really in question, its pretty damn obvious given the numbers.
We're discussing how people are smart, of course.
|
I think this is a great addition to the thor. As most of you have concluded in the thread, the HIP is great under different circumstances which I like since it makes the player have to make a decision wether to use it or not. What would be most effective would probably be to have a mix of thors with javelins and HIP.
|
Why is people thinking that thors should counter broodlords ? They shouldn't, they are now a bulky multipurpose unit, not a direct counter to anything specifically speaking aside light air if clumped up. The new strike cannon make them more multipurpose, which it is it's role imho. The only thing i find it's missing from the thor, is the ability to shoot air + ground at the same time.
Vikings are our direct counter to broodlords. Ravens to corruptors, and micro/spread to fungal since now it has 8 range and it is a projectile.
|
Indeed, the thor is not cost effective versus broods, but they can do a bit better now in the new mode.
|
If they just gave the Thor resistance to splash damage it would have a nice role as mech's meathshield.
|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
On December 11 2012 18:59 Zrana wrote:
If they just gave the Thor resistance to splash damage it would have a nice role as mech's meathshield.
It's not even Splash that's an issue with the thor, it's just stuff like broodlings really mucking up their movement AI.
|
On December 11 2012 19:01 Qikz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2012 18:59 Zrana wrote:
If they just gave the Thor resistance to splash damage it would have a nice role as mech's meathshield. It's not even Splash that's an issue with the thor, it's just stuff like broodlings really mucking up their movement AI.
Which is why you need hellbats in front to deal with those. I still don't see the problem here, thors with HIP are a step in the right direction without being OP. They shouldn't be the best solution to carriers and broodlords but at least they aren't completely useless against them anymore. Vikings and the new and improved raven in combination with the new thors should be more than enough to deal with broodlord infestor and the inevitable carrier/tempest/void ray/whatever comp that protoss will go for vs mech.
|
On December 11 2012 09:24 Qikz wrote:
Has anyone actually managed to get HiP to actually work against broodlords in a game?
Every time I try it I suffer the same problem as before with the Thors bugging out on the broodlings and never attacking constantly.
I think same rules apply that exist in WOL, that means you need hellions to deal with broodlings, you need to repair the thors and vikings are necessary if the BL numbers get out of hand.
Gotta understand the zerg POV too, broodlord tech is expensive and if thors just flat-out countered them they would never be made again.
|
You guys are greedy. 3-3 vikings and an anti air-armored thor (dont forget the mode switches to a 2sec only cooldown) isn't enought?
PS - Also feedback no longer destroys thors
|
i like the thor + viking combination as it is
if you lack vikings you can still go mass thor with this and beat unupgraded blords more easily than w/o the upgrade. yes its not a huge buff to it but its fine/good enough to now kill them a little bit more easily.
also i dont think it should be buffed and make the thor into a A-move unit that kills heavy air easily since its really resistent with upgrades.
|
Essentially this upgrade solves the big problem with the thor - namely that it is most effective in reasonably large numbers but is incredibly easy to kill with a tech switch to air. Now it's not so easy to kill with said tech switch and also is no longer vulnerable to feedback.
Also means it doubles up really nicely with battlecruisers as a super late game army.
|
On December 08 2012 10:51 eviltomahawk wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 10:45 RenZan wrote:
with the javelin missile you have to count 4 times the armor of the ennemy air unit. So if you target one big unit like broodlord for exemple the high impact payload do more damage. This is correct. Because the missiles deal damage separated into 4 missiles, armor deductions are counted 4 times. So assuming the target has 1 armor, each of the 6 damage missiles will have its damage reduced to 5, which makes the total damage only 20 instead of 24. With the cannons, the armor deduction is only counted once for the one instance of damage, so the 24 damage is only reduced to 23. Plus, the cannons have a cooldown of 2 seconds as opposed to the 3 second cooldown that the missiles have, so the cannons end up firing faster. Using the cannons, one Thor will beat one Broodlord. Using missiles, the Thor loses.
Ummm can you please verify this? I've tested it countless times in the unit tester and I can't see how one thor beats one broodlord...
|
On December 08 2012 18:05 SirPinky wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 17:04 Crawdad wrote:
This is so simple, I'm not sure why this thread is four pages long.
1) HIP has a shorter attack rate, and therefore has higher DPS.
2) HIP is not split into four separate attacks, and is therefore less affected by armor.
HIP does better against non-light units than EP, no questions asked. I'm so close to being done with this post b/c people like you. Please read the rest of the 4 pages before you comment. There is a reason for splash and its effectiveness. Please do not comment on this post unless you play Terran, are masters or higher and have the BETA. Thank you!
It's really simple. HP cannons already do 150% of the damage of Javelins without taking into account armour, take 1/4 of the losses due to armour and if you're talking a unit with 1 armour ALONE, you need to splash at least two with Javelins to keep up with HP cannons. At 3 armour you need to splash 3.
This is not empirical science. This is basic addition, subtraction and multiplication. This is definitely not a thread for pulling ladder rank on. I'm a gold leaguer and even I understand where I'll use these two modes.
Why can't you?
|
Has anyone tested how the single-target cannons scale with upgrades? The gains of switching to HIP-cannons may increase as both players get upgrades.
Thor vs generic 1-armor air-unit @ 0 upgrades:
Javelins: 4 x (6 - 1) = 20 damage per shot. 3 sec delay between shots, so 6.67 DPS.
HIP: 1 x (24 - 1) = 23 damage per shot. 2 sec delay between shots, so 11.5 DPS.
Thor vs generic 1-armor air-unit. Both at 3-3 upgrades. Assumption: HIP cannons gain +2 damage per upgrade (less than 10%, fairly conservative guess).
Javelins: 4 x (6 + 3 - 4) = 20 damage per shot. 6.67 DPS.
HIP: 1 x (24 + 6 - 4) = 26 damage per shot. 13 DPS.
So depending on how much the HIP mode gains from each upgrade, the advantages of using it over the Javelins can increase with upgrade-level, even if both players stay on equal upgrades.
|
i cant believe this thread exists, the advantages of HIP over EP is so obvious when dealing with armor units ESPECIALLY with upgrades its a no brainer.
|
On December 12 2012 00:00 BigAsia wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 10:51 eviltomahawk wrote:On December 08 2012 10:45 RenZan wrote:
with the javelin missile you have to count 4 times the armor of the ennemy air unit. So if you target one big unit like broodlord for exemple the high impact payload do more damage. This is correct. Because the missiles deal damage separated into 4 missiles, armor deductions are counted 4 times. So assuming the target has 1 armor, each of the 6 damage missiles will have its damage reduced to 5, which makes the total damage only 20 instead of 24. With the cannons, the armor deduction is only counted once for the one instance of damage, so the 24 damage is only reduced to 23. Plus, the cannons have a cooldown of 2 seconds as opposed to the 3 second cooldown that the missiles have, so the cannons end up firing faster. Using the cannons, one Thor will beat one Broodlord. Using missiles, the Thor loses. Ummm can you please verify this? I've tested it countless times in the unit tester and I can't see how one thor beats one broodlord...
Well when calculating this you have to ignore the Broodling damage, because if you want to deal with Broodlords by using Thors, then you need something to remove the Broodlings. And then a Broodlord deals around 22 damage vs 24 damage of the Thors, that attacks faster.
Even if Broodlings just deal 1-3 damage to a Thor, their attack speed is pretty high, and two Broodlings deal more damage then the Broodlord itself.
I like the Broodlord/Thor dynamic, as they both need support in beating up the other. And doing a direct comparison will never give useful data.
|
No damage upgrade will ever solve the main problem of BL vs Thor. The fact that in a 10 broods vs 10 thor fight at least 8 thors will dance to goa trance.
|
Is this still up for debate?
Javelin: strong vs. low armor, light-class and clumped up units.
HIP: strong vs. high armor, non-light-class and spread out units.
|
On December 13 2012 01:52 willoc wrote:
Is this still up for debate?
Javelin: strong vs. low armor, light-class and clumped up units.
HIP: strong vs. high armor, non-light-class and spread out units.
I think what is up for debate is whether the second niche is actually worth anything. Specifically, the "spread out" part. BCs tend to be spread, but pretty much every other capital ship gets used in a big ball--and the thing is, switching modes takes too long to do it in combat after you see how your opponent has positioned his ships, so you'll often have to make a guess prior to the engagement, which means 95% of the time you'll just leave it in javeline mode regardless of enemy composition. that just isn't interesting.
HIP should be better vs the stuff its designed to be good against, so that the choice is actually an interesting one.
|
Who else thinks the canons should be a bit more visually noticeable in HIP mode? If a thor transformed without me looking I probably wouldn't even notice until looking at it a few times.
|
On December 13 2012 01:56 awesomoecalypse wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2012 01:52 willoc wrote:
Is this still up for debate?
Javelin: strong vs. low armor, light-class and clumped up units.
HIP: strong vs. high armor, non-light-class and spread out units. I think what is up for debate is whether the second niche is actually worth anything. Specifically, the "spread out" part. BCs tend to be spread, but pretty much every other capital ship gets used in a big ball--and the thing is, switching modes takes too long to do it in combat after you see how your opponent has positioned his ships, so you'll often have to make a guess prior to the engagement, which means 95% of the time you'll just leave it in javeline mode regardless of enemy composition. that just isn't interesting. HIP should be better vs the stuff its designed to be good against, so that the choice is actually an interesting one.
I notice top tier zergs usually spread their broodlords out. I believe in ZvT you will want HIP-mode unless it's early game or they are going muta-heavy (which I don't think ever happens past a point in time).
|
OK. A new thing after the newest patch (the muta regen patch) is a ninja buff to thor. So, when colossus is out of range 7, thor uses the high-impact attack, when colossus is within range 7, thor uses ground attack. Awesome.
|
On December 16 2012 08:31 larse wrote:
OK. A new thing after the newest patch (the muta regen patch) is a ninja buff to thor. So, when colossus is out of range 7, thor uses the high-impact attack, when colossus is within range 7, thor uses ground attack. Awesome.
Are you implying Thors won't use their AA splash missiles (I forgot the name) when in enemy Colossus is in range? Only high-impact works like this?
|
|
|
Ok I've been messing around in the HotS unit tester, and the damage is Noticeably better with HIP vs Javelin unless your opponent is purposely clumping up his Broodlords.
I tested this at Maxed 3/3 for both (Even 3/3 ground for broodling damage) and No Upgrades and in both situations the HIP did more damage. I tested this 1v1, 2v2, 6v6, 10v10. Not saying this is the counter to Broodlords because of bad Thor size/pathing but the damage is much better with the HIP then the standard Javelins.
Unless someone else has tested otherwise.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
