|
On October 30 2011 18:13 Xapti wrote:Looks a bit like a unit that belongs in C&C or Supreme Commander, or Battletech. I'm completely fine with it being in SC2, but it seems very uninspired none the less. Show nested quote +On October 25 2011 22:10 Archybaldie wrote:
Whenever i look at it i see the loki from mechwarrior. Yeah, or a Warhammer or Summoner
Exactly. Compared to Thors, goliaths, Vikings, Vultures, wraiths, battlecruisers, predators, Odin, marines, firebats, marauders and raven looks as out of place as an accountant in a Delta Force company.
|
What about the ED-209 from Robocop. Put some missile launchers on the top and it's good to go.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
anyone interested in mechwarrior 4 again, Microsoft released the full version of mercs for free this year, and mektek has been (and still is) patching and updating the game.
http://www.mektek.net/index.php/home/articles/mechwarrior4-mercenaries-downloads-r1204
Also, the crysis mod Living Legends is really, really good. It's a very, very technical throwback to the old style of mechwarrior (in-cockpit only, complex controls, very hard to use, players can be infantry, helicopters, tanks/artillery, jets, etc.)
|
I think its not that bad. Its really simple, but Model isn't that important. Animations and Sound are much more important. 
|
Looks terribad ,the model in HoTS Custom game looks 100x better ,jezus christ blizzard get your **** together and don't put this abomination into the game.
|
On October 30 2011 16:22 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2011 16:17 Mortal wrote:On October 30 2011 16:12 BrosephBrostar wrote:
if they bring the goliath back wouldn't they have to change the viking too?
sshh, that would mean blizzard actually thought about the implications of a unit before implementing it. and that would be ludacris Gotta say i was concerned when dustin said that they were not even considering things like terrans being forced to use more scans to deal with more burrowed stuff etc in the TL interview, he said it in a like NOOOO we dont even think that far ahead, we will get there when the game is out type of stance
I rather prefer it that way. Blizzard's job is to make interesting units that fit within certain race-specific design ethics, then adjust these units so that the game is fair to all players (ie: balanced).
So what if it makes Terrans use more scans or lay down some more detectors? As long as it doesn't unbalance the game, it's fine. What matters is whether the Terrans can reasonably adapt to the new environment that involves more burrowed attackers. And they will only be able to tell if that's the case by playtesting.
It's like saying that a unit that has AoE, lots of single-target damage, and has 11 range attacks is unfair because it forces the enemy to work around it. By your logic, Blizzard ca. 1997 should have scrapped the Siege Tank.
You make cool stuff, then you make it work. And burrow-move Banelings is undoubtedly cool. It may be brutally unfair, but so are Siege Tanks. Adapt and overcome.
|
I'd do away with the arms, and shorten the torso as a whole to make it look less like an SCV.
I'd put the cannon over one shoulder, and use the big bulky design that Marine machine guns have in the concept art, but obviously scaled upwards. Particularly notable would be the big heavy barrels and enormous caliber of the weapon. For the AA missiles, I really like the Thor's back-mounted style, but honestly what I think would be even cooler would be a pair of flak cannons on the back, which would make more sense as a light+ splash weapon (ala Red Alert 2).
|
It looks weak. Weakness is not a good look for a war unit. Plus this is a video game, half the reason to play is cause it looks cool. Make it look cool.
And Blizzard is trying way too hard to NOT be like BW regardless of what they say. BW was awesome and instead of running away from it, embrace it. You can call the Warhound whatever you like, but its a Goliath. Just a crappier version.
|
It is very uninspiring. I'd have much preferred bringing back the goliath instead of trying to be fancy (lol) with making a new unit warhound.
|
I'm not sure it's a write off, but it needs more love.
|
On November 05 2011 12:04 mlspmatt wrote:
It looks weak. Weakness is not a good look for a war unit. Plus this is a video game, half the reason to play is cause it looks cool. Make it look cool.
And Blizzard is trying way too hard to NOT be like BW regardless of what they say. BW was awesome and instead of running away from it, embrace it. You can call the Warhound whatever you like, but its a Goliath. Just a crappier version.
If Blizzard were really trying not to be like SC1, then they would have ditched the Siege Tank long ago. No, Blizzard's problem is that they want to have it both ways. They want to keep certain "iconic" units, but having those iconic units forces them into a narrow design space that leads to units that are similar to SC1 units.
Siege Tanks are produced at a Factory, and their primary vulnerability is from air units. So long as that's true, there needs to be at least one decent anti-air unit from the Factory, or things don't really work.
Also, besides how it looks, what's "crappier" about it? That it doesn't have ridiculous range? That it's GtG attack is actually good? That it has AoE on its GtA attack?
|
On November 06 2011 12:13 NicolBolas wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 12:04 mlspmatt wrote:
It looks weak. Weakness is not a good look for a war unit. Plus this is a video game, half the reason to play is cause it looks cool. Make it look cool.
And Blizzard is trying way too hard to NOT be like BW regardless of what they say. BW was awesome and instead of running away from it, embrace it. You can call the Warhound whatever you like, but its a Goliath. Just a crappier version. If Blizzard were really trying not to be like SC1, then they would have ditched the Siege Tank long ago. No, Blizzard's problem is that they want to have it both ways. They want to keep certain "iconic" units, but having those iconic units forces them into a narrow design space that leads to units that are similar to SC1 units. Siege Tanks are produced at a Factory, and their primary vulnerability is from air units. So long as that's true, there needs to be at least one decent anti-air unit from the Factory, or things don't really work. Also, besides how it looks, what's "crappier" about it? That it doesn't have ridiculous range? That it's GtG attack is actually good? That it has AoE on its GtA attack?
The role of Goliath was GtA that could shoot ground as a secondary. Every race has a GtA unit, Hydralisks and Dragoons/Stalkers. The only difference was in BW, mass muta was dealt by Goliath and in WoL, the Thor.
I think the Warhound shouldn't have been made at all. Let the shredder take over GtA defence role and remove the warhound entirely since marines fulfil the GtA role quite well.
|
it looks clunky and has a lot of sharp corners
|
it's ugly tbh, i think its just ugly
|
I don't really think it fits into the terran look TBH, i hope they change it.
|
Do ultras tip them over? It looks like an ultra would tip it over.
|
On November 06 2011 15:20 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2011 12:13 NicolBolas wrote:On November 05 2011 12:04 mlspmatt wrote:
It looks weak. Weakness is not a good look for a war unit. Plus this is a video game, half the reason to play is cause it looks cool. Make it look cool.
And Blizzard is trying way too hard to NOT be like BW regardless of what they say. BW was awesome and instead of running away from it, embrace it. You can call the Warhound whatever you like, but its a Goliath. Just a crappier version. If Blizzard were really trying not to be like SC1, then they would have ditched the Siege Tank long ago. No, Blizzard's problem is that they want to have it both ways. They want to keep certain "iconic" units, but having those iconic units forces them into a narrow design space that leads to units that are similar to SC1 units. Siege Tanks are produced at a Factory, and their primary vulnerability is from air units. So long as that's true, there needs to be at least one decent anti-air unit from the Factory, or things don't really work. Also, besides how it looks, what's "crappier" about it? That it doesn't have ridiculous range? That it's GtG attack is actually good? That it has AoE on its GtA attack? The role of Goliath was GtA that could shoot ground as a secondary. Every race has a GtA unit, Hydralisks and Dragoons/Stalkers. The only difference was in BW, mass muta was dealt by Goliath and in WoL, the Thor. I think the Warhound shouldn't have been made at all. Let the shredder take over GtA defence role and remove the warhound entirely since marines fulfil the GtA role quite well.
Hydralisks and Dragoons were not GtA units. They were ground units that could shoot air; they did the same damage to air targets as ground. The Goliath had 10 range GtA attacks with 10x2 explosive GtA attacks, which gain +2 per missile per upgrade.
Hydralisks and Dragoons were just generalist ranged units; Goliaths were specialists. They were made to kill air. They had to kill air in order to prevent Siege Tanks from being overrun by AtG units.
The problem with using Marines to be GtA is the lack of range. The GtA defense unit for Siege Tanks needs to be able to ward off air attacks, but it also needs to cover as much territory as the Siege Tanks themselves. Otherwise, they can force your Marine ball out of position (send some Mutas forward) then flank you with their superior mobility to pick off tanks.
You can't flank the 10 range of Goliaths; that's why BW gave them that upgrade. Even if they give chase for a bit, they've still got more than 50% of the range of most AtG attackers.
Also, Marines don't come from Factories, so they don't get the same upgrades as STs. So you have to split upgrades. Plus, Marines have squat for HP, so any decent AoE can neutralize them. Notice that Goliaths have neither of those weaknesses.
The upgrade structure of the Terrans mean that they have to pick a building and more or less stick with it. So each building (except the StarPort) needs to be more or less self-sufficient. The Factory needs some kind of GtA option.
|
I greatly disklike it. It looks like a weird pastiche of various weapons on a box with legs. Why does it have a satellite dish and a boombox on it's shoulders (direct tv?)?. It just looks like something blizzard threw together because they wanted it to NOT be a Goliath. Just make it a damned goliath that shoots anti-mech ground to ground shells instead of guns.
|
Please just make it into a Goliath and scrap that fucking anti-mech damage bullshit while you're at it. But at LEAST use the Goliath model...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://keiththegooner.footballunited.com/files/2011/02/ed209.jpg)
