Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 33

Thread: Can someone explain why there are two different aesthetic looks for the Thor?[PICS]

  1. #11

    Default Re: Can someone explain why there are two different aesthetic looks for the Thor?[PIC

    Quote Originally Posted by Rezildur View Post
    lol what is with the hate on the Thor? I think its a great unit.
    Come on... It's a 400hp unit that mass murders light air units at 10 range, and deals 60 damage against ground targets. You can also stun and deal 500 dmg to a single unit or building among 6 seconds. I see that Blizzard wanted people to tech, but they went a little bit too heavy on the damage dealed, specially with the air attack range, and it's dmg vs light targets. The idea with bonusses, is to give some unis weaknesses that can be exploited, not make some attacks so powerful vs some units, that it totally negates their use on that area. This is specially critical for AoE attacks, which can have this effect very easily, like it happened with the BW air model, which was plagued by splash all over it, and rendered the previous air units almost completely useless in their presence.

  2. #12

    Default Re: Can someone explain why there are two different aesthetic looks for the Thor?[PIC

    i have yet to see a game be decided by someone getting mass thors or just by having 1 thor alone.

  3. #13

    Default Re: Can someone explain why there are two different aesthetic looks for the Thor?[PIC

    Quote Originally Posted by Norfindel View Post
    Come on... It's a 400hp unit that mass murders light air units at 10 range, and deals 60 damage against ground targets. You can also stun and deal 500 dmg to a single unit or building among 6 seconds. I see that Blizzard wanted people to tech, but they went a little bit too heavy on the damage dealed, specially with the air attack range, and it's dmg vs light targets. The idea with bonusses, is to give some unis weaknesses that can be exploited, not make some attacks so powerful vs some units, that it totally negates their use on that area. This is specially critical for AoE attacks, which can have this effect very easily, like it happened with the BW air model, which was plagued by splash all over it, and rendered the previous air units almost completely useless in their presence.
    It's a great unit. It's meant for support. Two thors can easily get crushed by 12~++ Speedlings.


    Quote Originally Posted by dustinbrowder View Post
    You are very weird man. Have you no logic?
    And again you had to be pretty big noob about PC not to know about the change, I mean even the birds on the trees knew about it.

    ...Its like calling throwing stone an athletic competition. Get a grip man and don't write nonsense...
    Shot put anyone?

  4. #14

    Default Re: Can someone explain why there are two different aesthetic looks for the Thor?[PIC

    Quote Originally Posted by hyde View Post
    Two thors can easily get crushed by 12~++ Speedlings.
    Of course, but what if you need Mutalisks there for some reason? In PvT, Phoenix are good to lift Siege Tanks, but Thors kill Phoenix too fast and from very far away (great, as if the Marines were not enough!). Zealots destroy Thors, but Siege Tanks destroy Zealots with their splash. If there are Siege Tanks, they *must* be taken down or disabled somehow very fast, as their range and damage is very strong.
    I suppose that the Brood Lord is a real saver in those situations.
    Last edited by Norfindel; 08-18-2010 at 12:45 PM.

  5. #15

    Default Re: Can someone explain why there are two different aesthetic looks for the Thor?[PIC

    Quote Originally Posted by Norfindel View Post
    Of course, but what if you need Mutalisks there for some reason? In PvT, Phoenix are good to lift Siege Tanks, but Thors kill Phoenix too fast and from very far away (great, as if the Marines were not enough!).
    Why would you use Phoenix against the Thor even if they could lift them?

    Zealots destroy Thors, but Siege Tanks destroy Zealots with their splash. If there are Siege Tanks, they *must* be taken down or disabled somehow very fast, as their range and damage is very strong.
    Immortals - look into them. I'd also go with maybe some Void Rays.
    SC2 handle - "DrakeyC, code 929"

    I ARE A PROPHET! I've predicted three major aspects of SC2 correct, more or less.

    June 2007 - I predicted the Protoss campaign would give you new tech as you conducted diplomacy among tribes.

    Hidden Content:
    July 18th 2010 - I predicted Raynor would broadcast information of Mengsk's actions on Tarsonis to discredit him and incite rebellion.


    Hidden Content:
    June 16th 2010 I predicted the Voice in the Darkness was the commanding force behind the Hybrids. I'm calling it half-right.

  6. #16
    Aznargo's Avatar Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    178

    Default Re: Can someone explain why there are two different aesthetic looks for the Thor?[PIC

    Quote Originally Posted by Legion View Post
    Its in the campaign editor the "terratron" you just have to look for it
    However, you must be careful if you use the evil Terra-tron because

    HE DOES NOT LIKE YOU!!!

    Adun Toridas!
    Current Status - The Worst SC2 Player of All Time

  7. #17

    Default Re: Can someone explain why there are two different aesthetic looks for the Thor?[PIC

    Quote Originally Posted by Noctis View Post
    i have yet to see a game be decided by someone getting mass thors or just by having 1 thor alone.
    Actually I just recently got caught versus this guy who used them... He only had marines and thors and alot of scv's to kill them.

    The only REAL problem was that in the heat of the battle I forgot to uppgrade neural parasite AND OMG WAS I ANGRY WHEN HE TOTALLY STOMPED ME. I had alot of infestors, but I forgot the uppgrade and everything was lost.

  8. #18

    Default Re: Can someone explain why there are two different aesthetic looks for the Thor?[PIC

    Quote Originally Posted by Drake Clawfang View Post
    Why would you use Phoenix against the Thor even if they could lift them?
    I never said i used the Phoenix against the Thor. There's just no way to do that, lol!

    Quote Originally Posted by Drake Clawfang View Post
    Immortals - look into them. I'd also go with maybe some Void Rays.
    In my experience, the Immortal sucks too much for it's cost if it happends to be infantry there, and it's likely to be, because it's just so cheap.
    Immortal + Colossi should work pretty well, but it's expensive, and it's very easy to get contained by a Terran player.

  9. #19

    Default Re: Can someone explain why there are two different aesthetic looks for the Thor?[PIC

    Quote Originally Posted by Norfindel View Post
    Because Blizzard needs to offer something in the collector's edition, even if it's a model for a unit that has no place in a decent RTS game.
    This is why I don't post.


  10. #20

    Default Re: Can someone explain why there are two different aesthetic looks for the Thor?[PIC

    Quote Originally Posted by Norfindel View Post
    Because Blizzard needs to offer something in the collector's edition, even if it's a model for a unit that has no place in a decent RTS game.
    wait wat.

Similar Threads

  1. Can someone explain the Roach to me?
    By Rezildur in forum StarCraft II Discussion
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 03-04-2010, 04:55 PM
  2. Pics from G-Star 2009 in Korea
    By Alex06 in forum StarCraft II Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 12-16-2009, 03:50 PM
  3. Glynnis Pics
    By n00bonicPlague in forum Off-Topic Lounge
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-01-2009, 07:34 AM
  4. Signature pics and text
    By n00bonicPlague in forum Site Issues / Feedback
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-11-2009, 01:24 AM
  5. Starcraft fan pics
    By Perfecttear in forum StarCraft Universe Lore Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-11-2009, 11:51 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •