|
This unit sounds cool to me. Since so many other things are in limbo why not keep this on the table as an option.
On April 30 2008 14:44 [X]Ken_D wrote:EDIT: I take it back. It's a bad idea. It is high HP units that ALSO attacks fast which is BADDD. Ultra/BC/Carriers are good against medium/large units because of their high HP, but don't fight so well against weaker units because of their slow attacks. This Gunboat counters small ground, small air, medium ground, medium air so basically almost everything plus it can fly. Oh and it is range and can be repaired. Imagine, having 12 marine with HP of an ultralisk & can fly. That's basically your gunship right there.
I think the archons are comparable, especially if the gunboats range is decreased.
|
gunboat? i hope you're not proposing water units now.
starcraft + water = bad. just like
cats + water = bad
|
As much as I love gunships, I have to say that IMO, this is too command&conquer-ish. One of the reasons SC is great is that each unit has a relatively specific role. I think a flying bunker that changes based on the units loaded inside is too versatile. In other RTS games, the firepower and versatility of gunships is offset by either their cost, low health or weakness against a specific unit. Alot of people are saying that we should dismiss the issue of balance for now. I agree that this idea is totally cool and I'd love to see it implemented somehow but there are a finite number of ways you can adjust balance. Personally, I'm against the "oh...it's too power... lets make it more expensive" psychology. Spawning pool for 150min was imba for a very different reason. I don't really know what I'm trying to get at. I'll stop.
|
On May 01 2008 06:54 gwho wrote:
gunboat? i hope you're not proposing water units now.
starcraft + water = bad. just like
cats + water = bad
Did you even read the thread?
|
I would like it if you could get an upgrade at the control tower one that allows for medivac and one that allows for gunboating. With some balance it would be amazing. I would, I have to say, actually prefer a ground gunboat, like a bunker on wheels :O.
|
It's called an APC.
As for the +200 minerals, it's not about the actual trouble of having marines on hand (which everybody does,) it's what you won't be able to do with them. The "everybody has marines" argument would make sense if we were addressing the building-marines time aspect of it, but we aren't, just the 200 minerals (you just paid for them earlier.) A note; an anti-air gunship would not be especially great, in my opinion. An AA-only marine-loaded dropship has less hit points, takes more supply, and is more expensive than a Scout, if you're using it as a combat unit. If it's a transport with defense, it's a slow shuttle that can load two zealots and shoot like a corsair. Hardly impressive.
|
I think it should have a default weapon. Like chainguns with a range of 5 and 5 damage?
Because without it, your name is completely invalid.
You wouldn't call a Huey a gunship because it has no default weapon. You'd call an Apache, Hercules, or a HIND a gunship.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Meh I think the point is the marines man the guns / fire out of the ship.
Names don't have to make complete sense.
|
How would firebats work with a gunboat?
If the gunboat allows for medics, scvs, and ghosts, then it should allow for firebats. But with 4 firebats and splash damage, a single run would destroy the mineral lines completely.
And names don't have to make sense.
I bring to mind the "Scout", which I've never seen used for scouting.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Firebats would definitely not be able to fire from air to ground tho, I mean come on, flames wont have that kind of reach 
Firebats aren't in the game right now anyway, I don't think.
|
well... not that saying things matters all that much,
and I think the conversation going on over all this is probably more important than just saying it again in a more official thread:
Yeah! I would love to see the gunship/gunboat put into the game. Balance issues would have to be sorted out of course but I think it's a great idea.
|
On April 30 2008 21:46 shimmy wrote:
I like the idea. Gunship >>>> Medivac.
|
Although actually someone brought up a good idea earlier, involving the use of the Gunboats having to land in order to attack ground. However, I am not too sure about this, because it would take away from the sort of harrassing that may occur.
My solution for balance is simple: give the Gunboat two modes. In one mode, it is able to move with the speed of a dropship, but the units inside cannot do anything. In the other mode, which will take two seconds to switch between, the gunship moves about the speed of a BC, but the units can now shoot out of. While the modes are switching, the Gunboat is unable to move or shoot. So it's like a flying bunker siege tank. You can call the two modes "Dropship Mode" and "Gunboat Mode."
|
|
|
I think I'm missing something but it just sounds like a complicated air unit. Although making marines viable later game is cool, It's just an air unit 0.o It also sounds kind of expensive for a harass unit and terran already has stuff that can harass.
|
firebats aren't in the game, but what about team melee mode? can protoss/zerg units go in the gunboat?
|
On May 01 2008 05:04 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Dark archon.
Lol. I don't know why I always call them Red Archons other than they're red. I don't use dark archons much neither my opponent.
|
On May 01 2008 05:30 evanthebouncy! wrote:
APPROVE IN PLACE OF TORPEDO CANNON FOR BC
The gunship doesn't fill in the role of what the SC2 BC splash damage (torpedo cannons?) did. The new SC2 BC splash damage made SC1 TvT significantly improve and decrease the duration of late game.
|
Instead make it a mid game upgrade for the bunker to lift off and fly at dropship speed... It has to land again to fire..... or perhaps even remain stationary in the air... Should prolly be a slight hp buff or range buff with the upgrade depending on pricing and prereq tech
|
On May 01 2008 08:00 EmeraldSparks wrote:
It's called an APC.
As for the +200 minerals, it's not about the actual trouble of having marines on hand (which everybody does,) it's what you won't be able to do with them. The "everybody has marines" argument would make sense if we were addressing the building-marines time aspect of it, but we aren't, just the 200 minerals (you just paid for them earlier.) A note; an anti-air gunship would not be especially great, in my opinion. An AA-only marine-loaded dropship has less hit points, takes more supply, and is more expensive than a Scout, if you're using it as a combat unit. If it's a transport with defense, it's a slow shuttle that can load two zealots and shoot like a corsair. Hardly impressive.
"I need an APC pickup"
"mid air is like sex. if you don't have it, it's all you think about. if you do have it, it's nothing special."
-----
anyways, about the gunboat. I think it can land for certain units to fire from inside. for example, though for marines, medics, scvs, and ghosts to do stuff, it can stay flying (but can't move when ghost is doing calldown), the gunboat will have to land for other units to be able to fire from inside, such as marauders, and firebats.
basically, any unit that has attack that can attack ground or air, will be able to shoot from inside the gunboat even when its flying. but if the unit only has a ground to ground attack (marauder, firebat, vulture, etc), then the gunboat will have to land for it to attack ground, and the gunboat will not be able to attack air.
it only makes sense. if a unit can attack land and ground, it should be able to attack land and ground while flying. but if a unit can only attack ground, then it will not be able to attack air while flying, and it will only be within reach of ground when it has landed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
