|
Sweden33719 Posts
On October 22 2009 02:11 Qatol wrote:
Didn't the Thor originally have a really long range gun barrage which required energy to use (I don't believe it is the same as the 250mm cannon ability you have described)? I was under the impression that (at least one of) the Thor's purpose(s) was to break tank standoffs in TvT. I always thought that was a really cool feature and added a lot to the matchup. However, I haven't heard much about that ability in a while. I'm guessing it is gone now?
250mm Cannons (Previous Version)
Bombardment cannons in action.Artillery Strike was a powerful long-ranged area-of-effect attack. To use the Artillery Strike, the thor had to expend energy, then it "stabilized" itself as the cannons on its back were lowered. The four 250mm bombardment cannons alternated raining damage upon the area. This ability needed to be researched. The ability was later removed.
http://starcraft.wikia.com/wiki/Thor
|
On October 22 2009 02:03 SiZ.FaNtAsY wrote:
I just feel that you can only have 1 true powerhouse unit per race.
Zerg has big brothers
Toss has instawin carriers (reason why I don't like the mothership)
Therefore Terran should either have BCS or the thor. Not both.
Just my 2 cent
but Zerg also has defilers
Toss also has carriers
Terran also has ghosts/nukes
|
Disagree with most of the ideas.
It is one thing to have ideas, it is another to have them actually work in the game. While I agree that thor has issues and is not very interesting the solutions proposed are old and problematic.
-----------------
SCV Construction:
Don't need to build anti-air or multiple factories to prepare a pump, just spam thor if air tech is spotted! Every race is limited in its macro by buildings, and this breaks the rules. The thor being a "do it all unit" as is, really make building planning less important, macro more lazy and make factories worthless targets in base raids. It also means more annoying macro, while 300/300 isn't "that big" of a unit, when units carriers are spammed.
Mechanical Rebirth
There isn't enough time for the opponent to actually not target thor's wreck. It wouldn't make sense if the opponents won't automatically attack either, since it is path blocking hostile unit which really ought to be attacked. If the unit is made "neutral" or "noncombatant" in targeting priority, it would totally mess up mass melee armies and add annoying micro to its opponents.
Mobile Bunker
400HP unsnipable EMP machine that can be repaired and fires nukes? God it can just tank its way into opponent armies and do awful things to them. This power totally overwrite whatever character the unit has and makes a bunker with fancy stuff around it. But really, terran infantry should have terran infantry's weakness behind it and larger units that needs to do the job of infantry should have those abilites built in. Opponents should have a chance of stopping the infantry from carrying out its job, and that is why the medic was removed. (since medics can't really be sniped pratically)
Lift off
Yes, every unit must cliff walk..... With everything else cliff walking/flying/transported, terrans wouldn't build seige tanks and would be a air/medivac+infantry/thor army which loses very little for that.
But really, it is crazy to suggest that because something is large, that it ought to fly. Shouldn't sensible people realize that large things have a harder time flying?
Armor facing/Super Slow Rotation speed
Too micro intensive for Starcraft scale of gaming. When people are controlling blob armies all over the map, controlling a flank to target a single unit is just too much detail. Compare to squeezing out a extra psi storm or plague, armor just isn't important enough.
Modules
Annoying to manage and differentiate in the heat of battle. If there is interesting abilities out there, just add it to the baseline unit instead of making it "occasionally interesting."
|
I really liked the modules idea, although I think it should be more like tanks sieging. Press a button: anti-air. Press a different button: anti ground. I don't think it should cost any monetary resources, but rather time, much like going into and out of siege mode.
|
It might be hard to make a super large unit like that "look" right in combat. It would pretty much have to fly if it were any larger than it is due to terrain considerations. But that might make it more interesting in terms of placement.
I could see scv's building special purpose mech machines, but I don't know if I like the idea of being able to refit them on the fly. I would rather you sink a minute and 300/300 into building it and then you use it as best you can. If you built a bunker bot when you needed a mobile missle turret, too bad.
As for rotation, I'm surprised the upper half stays in sync with its legs. It seems like it should be possible to make the torso swing around quickly, but only for maybe 60 degrees, afterwhich it must wait for its legs to catch up. This would make flanking moves useful, but still allow it to have a good front, and would make for interesting positioning.
|
A lot of these are excellent ideas. The variable armour and the rebuild after death are great IMO. However, lift-off might make a group of thors too viable for insane harassment or CC/Nexus/Hatchery sniping. They can lift onto a cliff to backdoor, use the 5 second 500 damage ability as a group, then run away. While dangerous because of their speed, their tank-ness makes it arguably too powerful.
|
On October 22 2009 02:31 SWPIGWANG wrote:
Disagree with most of the ideas.
It is one thing to have ideas, it is another to have them actually work in the game. While I agree that thor has issues and is not very interesting the solutions proposed are old and problematic.
-----------------
SCV Construction:
It also means more annoying macro, while 300/300 isn't "that big" of a unit, when units carriers are spammed.
Lift off
But really, it is crazy to suggest that because something is large, that it ought to fly. Shouldn't sensible people realize that large things have a harder time flying?
Who exactly is spamming carriers just like that?
The lift off totally makes sense. How can a huge unit like the Thor fit in a dropship? Of course it makes sense that is has his own lift-off function to be able to move across un-walkable terrain.
|
Hoping they just take the unit out -_-. And I really dislike any "front defense, back defense" mechanic.. just doesn't seem very Starcraft.
I like most of the new units but the Thor just seems retarded/unfixable. Just replace or nix the unit.
|
Ideally I would see the Thor as a low-count, highly customizable support unit, very potent/versatile but not something you would (under normal circumstances) mass produce. I'm fine with if, say, TvT becomes mass Thor wars - not unlike BC battles in TvT today, but what I don't want to see is it becoming something akin to ultra/ling, where it's used all the time.
There is three units at the factory/armory level tech. If such a unit can't be mass produced bread and butter then that tech path has....problems.....big ones. So we'll see bio+air with 1~2fact worth of tank support every game? lame. (but there is no other tech)
Anyway, if TvT degenerate into Thor stacks, I'd consider it a huge disaster since it is far lower tech than BC and just as boring tactically. At least BCs happens only occasionally after epic fights.
|
Nice writeup. I guess the option I like the most is the Modules idea- because it plays on another aspect of Terran mech, which is its clunkyness. Yes, Terran Mech is clumsy and clunky, yet very mighty. Siege Tanks need to switch between Tank mode and Siege mode; Goliaths have powerful anti-air, but they have pathing difficulties; Vultures are very fast, but the process of dropping Spider Mines is a bit clunky.
In SC2, the Viking could fit into that model with its switching between a walker mecha and a fighter plane, while the Siege Tank remains the same. Add to that a clunky Thor that has trouble switching its weaponry on the spot but is very deadly when wielding the correct weapon, and you have something with personality and flavor.
|
Sanya12364 Posts
Fitting inside dropships is insensible. But think about how slow the thor would fly, it would be completely vulnerable and doesn't have nearly the same hp as a real building. It'd be easily taken down.
|
How can a huge unit like the Thor fit in a dropship? Of course it makes sense that is has his own lift-off function to be able to move across un-walkable terrain.
I'd rather the Thor being not airlift-able and have to walk everywhere, than this.
If the Thor can fly, why the hell does it need such huge legs? Just make it a battlecruiser by adding big thrusters already. I'm so tired of giant mecha flying.....flying machine really don't need to be build like a human that is restricted to the earth does it. >.>
|
I think a big problem with the Thor stems from the fact that its armament doesn't suit what I perceived to be its role; that is, I thought the Thor was supposed to be the point man of an assault (ie. breaking tank lines in TvT, as someone mentioned). Yet its armament is fully ranged, so it ends up staying behind the absolute front lines, thus its armament contradicts what it LOOKS like it should do. Instead it becomes another siege tank, with less firepower, more mass, and the ability to hit air. Unfortunately the latter is a job already seemingly taken by that transformer-bot of which name I've forgotten. For the most part I agree with SWPIGWANG; a lot of the ideas are good in theory but they're, as Blizzard seems to have noted especially with the two scrapped ones, not that good in practice.
To be honest, I really feel like the Thor needs to turn into primarily a melee unit to become a point-man, which is the main thing missing from the terran arsenal I think, like Zealots and Ultralisks. And such a unit would be useful in almost every matchup I think. The balance would then be the building time as opposed to just cost (like defilers, which are relatively inexpensive but they take a lot of time to spawn), so you can't just make a legion of Thors and send them swinging that easily - although if you have the time and resources to do so, you can, like current TvT BCs.
|
I have to disagree with the first three ideas.
First off, the SCV construction mechanism was removed because it can totally break matchups, more specifically TvP. For example, the T is going say 6 rax and only 1 fact. He scouts out mass carriers with his comsat. He only has mnm, which isn't all that effective v. carriers. No problem, just pull 6 SCVs or so off the mineral line and build Thors. Protoss walks in, carrier fleet demolished in a couple seconds. The Thors then head out and roflstomp the Protoss base which has practically nothing because all their resources was just blown out of the sky, literally. Starcraft places a lot of emphasis on choosing the right tech and being punished for not. SCV construction of the Thor violates that concept.
Second, field repair, although it could be viable, probably won't be used much. Unless the field revival is extremely fast (which would make it broken) the enemy army would most likely just destroy the wreckage while they're at it. Either that, or they'll ignore it for a while then when they see the telltale Thor revival animation just focus fire it and kill it while it's useless.
Also, a mobile bunker would be very scary. Especially for a Protoss player if the Thor can just act as a safe house for Ghosts as they EMP and Nuke everything. Now, if special abilities can't be used while in the Thor, then it's a little more balanced. But even then you're essentially giving all the units within the Thor an additional 400 hp! If the units within the Thor die with the Thor, then perhaps it's a little more viable and the balancing issue would come to how many units can be fit at a time.
That's all I have for now...but I must say, I kinda like the lift off idea but having so many units that can cliff jump may be a bit much...
|
On October 22 2009 02:49 SWPIGWANG wrote:Show nested quote +How can a huge unit like the Thor fit in a dropship? Of course it makes sense that is has his own lift-off function to be able to move across un-walkable terrain. I'd rather the Thor being not airlift-able and have to walk everywhere, than this. If the Thor can fly, why the hell does it need such huge legs? Just make it a battlecruiser by adding big thrusters already. I'm so tired of giant mecha flying.....flying machine really don't need to be build like a human that is restricted to the earth does it. >.>
It has it's huge legs to be able to move on terrain while carrying such huge machinery. If it wouldn't be able to be transfered accross different terrains via air it wouldn't really be realistic. It is not supposted to be like a battlecruiser in the air.
|
The Thor needs 'something', and you put the finger on what that something might be. Nice post.
|
On October 22 2009 02:50 Southlight wrote:
To be honest, I really feel like the Thor needs to turn into primarily a melee unit to become a point-man, which is the main thing missing from the terran arsenal I think, like Zealots and Ultralisks. And such a unit would be useful in almost every matchup I think. The balance would then be the building time as opposed to just cost (like defilers, which are relatively inexpensive but they take a lot of time to spawn), so you can't just make a legion of Thors and send them swinging that easily - although if you have the time and resources to do so, you can, like current TvT BCs.
This is similar to something I've said before: Thor looks like it should best be (late-game) melee brawler. For sheer ridiculousity I'd like to see melee-Thor with lift-off just for the effect of the giant mech crashing down into the middle of a battle and pulverizing stuff, true Hollywood style, but I'm not sure that's really viable.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
SCV Construction:
Don't need to build anti-air or multiple factories to prepare a pump, just spam thor if air tech is spotted! Every race is limited in its macro by buildings, and this breaks the rules. The thor being a "do it all unit" as is, really make building planning less important, macro more lazy and make factories worthless targets in base raids. It also means more annoying macro, while 300/300 isn't "that big" of a unit, when units carriers are spammed.
I don't see this as a problem. And the cost of the unit is obviously subject to balance - I only said I wouldn't be talking about cost because I have NO basis on which to judge how much the unit is worth. Subject to balance.
Mechanical Rebirth
There isn't enough time for the opponent to actually not target thor's wreck. It wouldn't make sense if the opponents won't automatically attack either, since it is path blocking hostile unit which really ought to be attacked. If the unit is made "neutral" or "noncombatant" in targeting priority, it would totally mess up mass melee armies and add annoying micro to its opponents.
I don't think it's that big of a deal if they form obstacles while wrecked. Players are gonna be manually targetting units anyway so it's up to them to prioritize whether they want to finish off the wreck (and risk an SCV sneaking back to re-activate it once the battle is over), or not.
Mobile Bunker
400HP unsnipable EMP machine that can be repaired and fires nukes? God it can just tank its way into opponent armies and do awful things to them. This power totally overwrite whatever character the unit has and makes a bunker with fancy stuff around it. But really, terran infantry should have terran infantry's weakness behind it and larger units that needs to do the job of infantry should have those abilites built in. Opponents should have a chance of stopping the infantry from carrying out its job, and that is why the medic was removed. (since medics can't really be sniped pratically)
I had initially added a caveat about not being able to nuke from it but I removed it as I wasn't sure if you could even nuke from a normal bunker or not.
What's so different between this and a bunker anyway.
Anyway, I guess you hate the bunker?
Lift off
Yes, every unit must cliff walk..... With everything else cliff walking/flying/transported, terrans wouldn't build seige tanks and would be a air/medivac+infantry/thor army which loses very little for that.
But really, it is crazy to suggest that because something is large, that it ought to fly. Shouldn't sensible people realize that large things have a harder time flying?
Oh come on, that last line of your complaint is just petty. What about Terran buildings? They are all as big as a Thor, and they ALL fly.
Armor facing/Super Slow Rotation speed
Too micro intensive for Starcraft scale of gaming. When people are controlling blob armies all over the map, controlling a flank to target a single unit is just too much detail. Compare to squeezing out a extra psi storm or plague, armor just isn't important enough.
So most people won't have the time to exploit it except in small scale battles. So what? The ones capable of exploiting will get an edge.
Modules
Annoying to manage and differentiate in the heat of battle. If there is interesting abilities out there, just add it to the baseline unit instead of making it "occasionally interesting."
... Really? I guess Siege Mode is too annoying to manage as well. Meh.
On October 22 2009 02:59 Musoeun wrote:Show nested quote +On October 22 2009 02:50 Southlight wrote:
To be honest, I really feel like the Thor needs to turn into primarily a melee unit to become a point-man, which is the main thing missing from the terran arsenal I think, like Zealots and Ultralisks. And such a unit would be useful in almost every matchup I think. The balance would then be the building time as opposed to just cost (like defilers, which are relatively inexpensive but they take a lot of time to spawn), so you can't just make a legion of Thors and send them swinging that easily - although if you have the time and resources to do so, you can, like current TvT BCs. This is similar to something I've said before: Thor looks like it should best be (late-game) melee brawler. For sheer ridiculousity I'd like to see melee-Thor with lift-off just for the effect of the giant mech crashing down into the middle of a battle and pulverizing stuff, true Hollywood style, but I'm not sure that's really viable.
I think that would be a fine module option as well.
On October 22 2009 02:51 Ryuu314 wrote:
I have to disagree with the first three ideas.
First off, the SCV construction mechanism was removed because it can totally break matchups, more specifically TvP. For example, the T is going say 6 rax and only 1 fact. He scouts out mass carriers with his comsat. He only has mnm, which isn't all that effective v. carriers. No problem, just pull 6 SCVs or so off the mineral line and build Thors. Protoss walks in, carrier fleet demolished in a couple seconds. The Thors then head out and roflstomp the Protoss base which has practically nothing because all their resources was just blown out of the sky, literally. Starcraft places a lot of emphasis on choosing the right tech and being punished for not. SCV construction of the Thor violates that concept.
Second, field repair, although it could be viable, probably won't be used much. Unless the field revival is extremely fast (which would make it broken) the enemy army would most likely just destroy the wreckage while they're at it. Either that, or they'll ignore it for a while then when they see the telltale Thor revival animation just focus fire it and kill it while it's useless.
Also, a mobile bunker would be very scary. Especially for a Protoss player if the Thor can just act as a safe house for Ghosts as they EMP and Nuke everything. Now, if special abilities can't be used while in the Thor, then it's a little more balanced. But even then you're essentially giving all the units within the Thor an additional 400 hp! If the units within the Thor die with the Thor, then perhaps it's a little more viable and the balancing issue would come to how many units can be fit at a time.
That's all I have for now...but I must say, I kinda like the lift off idea but having so many units that can cliff jump may be a bit much...
1) Well, the Thor isn't supposed to be good vs Carriers I thought. Its supposed role is as a counter to light, mass air (ie Mutas).
2) Yeah, but it doesn't hurt to have it there basically.
3) Hm, is being able to house 4 marines really that huge of a deal? And I agree you shouldn't be able to nuke from a Thor.
|
I would like for all the unit changes and additions in SC2 to follow some sort of logic from SC1. The terran units in SC1 were designed to fight other terrans, and were used to fight the zerg and protoss because that was all they had. By the time we reach SC2 they should have units specially designed to fight zerg and protoss. I think a huge anti-air mech fits this perfectly, given the power of muta swarms and carrier fleets vs terran in SC1. It can't be picked off easily or sniped around the edged and can unleash a huge barrage of long range splash air damage.
I would slow the thor down from the speed seen in the battle report, bring back the characteristic that if it we caught on its own a faster ground unit to could run circles around it. The anti-air weapon, though, should be on a swiveling turret and be able to attack in any direction. I am not against the specializing/retrofitting idea, but that seems to intrude too much on where Blizzard is taking the battle cruiser.
I really like the idea of it being built and rebuilt by an scv. I think that is a really terran-fitting trait, like it would be used on some far frontier planet or something. The point was made in another thread that if protoss invested all the resources to switch to carriers a terran player could just grab a bunch of scvs and make all the thors needed at once. A special tech building for the thor could maybe counteract this, especially if the anti-air gun range or splash damage or something had to be researched afterward.
I am really against the thor having some sort of base/defense assault special ability. Too redundant with the siege tank.
The mobile bunker idea I think would work better as a different vehicle. Maybe ditch the hellion, bring back firebat and have a bunkerbuggy buildable at the factory? Could even hold two units when driving around, transform into static bunker to hold 4 units or something...
|
I think the Thor is god awful for one reason, that is one mother f'ing fast building.
Seeing the last battle report, they where zipping and turning around as fast as marauders. These are huge mechs, cant they behave like them? They seemed more mobile than goliaths in bw.
I think they should stay in the support role, using a reaver as an example. Big lumbering mech that has a huge firebase, but if flanked will get taken down easy without any support. The siege tank really fits the flavor of Terran, the Thor could compliment it. The problem is to not overide roles. Easily the Thor could be an air spam counter, he might as well have turrets on his shoulders. Artillery barrage (despite how perfect he seems for it) would conflict with nukes and siege tanks though. How about instead of a large area damage attack for ground support (because come on, who would use him if he was only good for anti air), he has a single shot long range cannon attack that is good against armored targets like the collusus and the utralisk. His current spell seems really funky. Pretty much, he could be a sniper against heavy targets in the air or ground. Let him be really slow so that hes easily fanked by fast units like zerglings and zealots if the terran gets reckless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
