Vikings and Ravens

[Nissa]

Okay, it's time for me to be that person. I haven't actually played SC2, despite having seen the plot online (up to ~1/3 of LotV) and thus I don't really have a grip on the units. Given how obsessed I get over the plot, I'm really not going to buy a game if I can't respect the story. So my question is this, as people who have played the game, what is your perception of the units Viking and Raven? How do you use them? Do you like them at all, or are they lame? Howe are they effectively used?

[Turalyon]

Is this a question about their place/value in lore and story or about how they function as a gameplay element? Either way, I can only speak for my own experience.

As for lore, the Viking seems kinda goofy and requires more suspension of disbelief to accept as being Terran tech. It's supposed to evoke the Siege tank transformation but something about it transforming from an air to ground unit and back again feels more fantastical/fake for some reason (maybe because the transformation feels more like a gimmicky "Doylist" reason for it's existence than it's "Watsonian" one?). The Raven feels more like a believable take on the evolution of Terran tech than the Viking, since it's supposed to be replacement for the original Science vessel. It's not that remarkable/interesting lorewise beyond just being a piloted drone with special abilities though.

I don't play multiplayer (let alone the game itself anymore), so I can't say anything about either being potentially "meta" but the Viking is pretty rad in Campaign/Co-op mode in it's anti-air role due to it's huge range and dps. Ravens are more situational - like most spellcaster units - and I didn't build or use them in Campaign/Co-op mode unless they were given or I was experimenting. Sure the Raven, like the Science Vessel, can be used for seeing through stealth but because Terrans have the Orbital Command for remote scanning of an area, it's rarely ever used for that sole purpose.

[The_Blade]

Honestly, in it's current state, SC2:LotV is becoming the game that was meant to be designed as SC2. I am kind of happy David Kim moved on to something else. The following list includes my favored features:

-Co-op as a stand alone mode with it's expanded missions and very diverse mechanics.
-Skins and customization
-Heavy balance changes (units can be redesigned completely on a season end patch)
-Pro-scene is very entertaining with variable design (cheese, rush, unconventional meta, heavy macro, all ins, etc)
-Arcade is starting to show signs of monetization (promised on 2010 lol)

I mention this because I feel like the Viking has finally been balanced into it's showcase roll of the Terran reveal back in 2009. I like it as a mechanic and a unit, unless I am playing TvT; and it feels very Terran. You can actually raid now, and they will clear a cannon or two in sufficient numbers. It's convenient vs Zerg and against Protoss it will negate most of the very common Void Prism harass. However, in TvT mirror mech matches it's a constant air superiority contest to avoid Liberators from clearing your shit. It's very micro intensive and I can quit a day of playing a set of 3 after the first match if I get this kind of game, regardless of the result.

On the other hand, the Raven has become a shadow of what it used to be. Its spells are very specialized, and it's been forced to play a role in TvT and TvP. Anti Armor missile is meh on most situations. Interference Matrix can help remove a caster or large unit out of combat, so it can be used well in the mid game. Turrets have been nerfed, so that Vikings have to be used in conjunction to raid; but point defense drone was an overall better synergy with the Viking. It's still a fun troll unit. Build 30 and spawn turrets everywhere if ahead. I've fallen out of the love for its art design. It feels like a random Star Wars droid now, IMO.


As for lore, the Viking seems kinda goofy and requires more suspension of disbelief to accept as being Terran tech. It's supposed to evoke the Siege tank transformation but something about it transforming from an air to ground unit and back again feels more fantastical/fake for some reason (maybe because the transformation feels more like a gimmicky "Doylist" reason for it's existence than it's "Watsonian" one?).

I'd consider that supense of disbelief as light as zerg propulsion, unlike the Hellbat. The later's transformation makes no sense in my mind or the Thor being a walker.

[Turalyon]

I'd consider that supense of disbelief as light as zerg propulsion, unlike the Hellbat. The later's transformation makes no sense in my mind or the Thor being a walker.

I forgot about the Hellion/Hellbat transformation thing! It's of a similar "ridiculousness" as the Viking transformation imo.

And yes, whilst I acknowledge that identifying something as being "ridiculous" in a universe where aliens have magical mind powers or organic bug aliens that can traverse deep space exist, the Terrans were more grounded/limited and "realistic" in their fictional tech compared to the Zerg or Protoss. I'm more accepting/can develop headcanon that Zerg flyers are able to propel themselves in space because they have anti-grav organs (the canon explanation of them farting gas has problems in that it wouldn't be self-sufficient nor practical for the organism in the long-term) because the race is more fantastical by nature. But eh, what do I know?!

[Nissa]

Is this a question about their place/value in lore and story or about how they function as a gameplay element?

Gameplay, definitely. I can look up lore, but I'm not shelling out money for a game I don't want, lol. I'm just trying to figure out how to use them narratively, but I don't want to say something stupid about them -- like how one writer (I forget who) said that SC1 dragoons were "maneuverable" or something like that. I think we all remember the pain of getting a dragoon up a set of map stairs (see: rescuing Zeratul mission).

Of the two, vikings definitely look more fun, at least for storytelling. The raven's a bit harder. I'm having it appear in one mission, but now that you guys are mentioning the rather spare/mid game use of it, I'm thinking that maybe it's not the way to go. What's a good air support unit, and (for narrative reasons) is not a viking? Or, I don't know, maybe I'll stick a couple of vikings in there. But is there a unit particularly good at going after one of those nydus wurms?

[Turalyon]

I'm just trying to figure out how to use them narratively, but I don't want to say something stupid about them -- like how one writer (I forget who) said that SC1 dragoons were "maneuverable" or something like that. I think we all remember the pain of getting a dragoon up a set of map stairs (see: rescuing Zeratul mission).

Goliaths were just as goofy as the Dragoons. It wasn't just pathing but due to the unit size being different when mobile or stationary. It was smaller when moving but larger when still, so when you had to cram a few up a ramp or bridge, the small pauses and movement would cause their collision boxes of the units to bump into each other (or the terrain) and they'd react by fidgeting away to make room.


Of the two, vikings definitely look more fun, at least for storytelling. The raven's a bit harder. I'm having it appear in one mission, but now that you guys are mentioning the rather spare/mid game use of it, I'm thinking that maybe it's not the way to go. What's a good air support unit, and (for narrative reasons) is not a viking? Or, I don't know, maybe I'll stick a couple of vikings in there. But is there a unit particularly good at going after one of those nydus wurms?

The Raven is really just a drone and the only support air unit for the Terrans in Sc2. Might want to consider the Science Vessel or Medivac Dropship instead?

Any unit that can attack Nydus Worms are "good" against them since they're defenceless (like the Sc1 Nydus Canals). Just gotta watch out for what comes out of the Nydus worm is all....

[Nissa]

Hm. Well, I need a machine capable of attacking that's also air power. What's good against roaches, in terms of air?

[Turalyon]

Hm. Well, I need a machine capable of attacking that's also air power. What's good against roaches, in terms of air?

Banshees (kinda like helicopters with missile pods) are dedicated Terran air-to-ground units in Sc2. Roaches can't attack air units as well, so yeah...

In LotV, there is the Liberator (kinda like a gunship). It has a defender mode, which makes it stationary and allows it to bombard ground units like air artillery by laying down an area of denial. Otherwise, it can only attack air-units in its mobile fighter form using an aoe attack like the BW Valkyrie.

[Mislagnissa]

I'm just trying to figure out how to use them narratively

How much experience do you have with writing military fiction in general?

[Nissa]

Banshees (kinda like helicopters with missile pods) are dedicated Terran air-to-ground units in Sc2. Roaches can't attack air units as well, so yeah...

In LotV, there is the Liberator (kinda like a gunship). It has a defender mode, which makes it stationary and allows it to bombard ground units like air artillery by laying down an area of denial. Otherwise, it can only attack air-units in its mobile fighter form using an aoe attack like the BW Valkyrie.

Thanks, I'll start looking at those to see if I want to use them for the situation. Banshees sound good, but might go with Lib.

[The_Blade]

I'd recommend also not going into the literal gameplay of a unit to work on a layout of the story. Most of the narrative elements I've read, where a game is the design reference, give this level of detail that IMO breaks the continuity of storytelling by diverting into the gameplay elements. The writer normally attempts to explain the situation through the familiarity of the reader with the game itself. Istead, use these references like a river and think on conventional ways to translate the game into a realistic/cohesive environment.

Bad example:
...Suddenly, a Terran Banshee decloaked from the air above and rained a volley of Backlash Rockets, which can only hit ground targets. As the roaches fled into their burrows a nearby Raven was sensing their movement through it's detection ability.

Better example:
...Suddenly, a glimmer of light in the sky revealed the metallic plate of a hovering Terran aircraft, which had been hiding from sight. It engaged the fleeing enemy with a volley of Backlash Rockets, which swiftly splattered the ground and splintered the creatures with molten shrapnel. As the Roaches fled into their burrows, a nearby droneship, known as a Raven, was following their movements through the underground by interpolating seismic readings from a local array of sensors. These were placed by the infantry corps prior to the engagement.

[Mislagnissa]

I'd recommend also not going into the literal gameplay of a unit to work on a layout of the story. Most of the narrative elements I've read, where a game is the design reference, give this level of detail that IMO breaks the continuity of storytelling by diverting into the gameplay elements. The writer normally attempts to explain the situation through the familiarity of the reader with the game itself. Istead, use these references like a river and think on conventional ways to translate the game into a realistic/cohesive environment.

Bad example:
...Suddenly, a Terran Banshee decloaked from the air above and rained a volley of Backlash Rockets, which can only hit ground targets. As the roaches fled into their burrows a nearby Raven was sensing their movement through it's detection ability.

Better example:
...Suddenly, a glimmer of light in the sky revealed the metallic plate of a hovering Terran aircraft, which had been hiding from sight. It engaged the fleeing enemy with a volley of Backlash Rockets, which swiftly splattered the ground and splintered the creatures with molten shrapnel. As the Roaches fled into their burrows, a nearby droneship, known as a Raven, was following their movements through the underground by interpolating seismic readings from a local array of sensors. These were placed by the infantry corps prior to the engagement.

Ditto. I can’t stress this enough. Gameplay is not realistic!

[Nissa]

I'd recommend also not going into the literal gameplay of a unit to work on a layout of the story. Most of the narrative elements I've read, where a game is the design reference, give this level of detail that IMO breaks the continuity of storytelling by diverting into the gameplay elements. The writer normally attempts to explain the situation through the familiarity of the reader with the game itself. Istead, use these references like a river and think on conventional ways to translate the game into a realistic/cohesive environment.

Bad example:
...Suddenly, a Terran Banshee decloaked from the air above and rained a volley of Backlash Rockets, which can only hit ground targets. As the roaches fled into their burrows a nearby Raven was sensing their movement through it's detection ability.

Better example:
...Suddenly, a glimmer of light in the sky revealed the metallic plate of a hovering Terran aircraft, which had been hiding from sight. It engaged the fleeing enemy with a volley of Backlash Rockets, which swiftly splattered the ground and splintered the creatures with molten shrapnel. As the Roaches fled into their burrows, a nearby droneship, known as a Raven, was following their movements through the underground by interpolating seismic readings from a local array of sensors. These were placed by the infantry corps prior to the engagement.

Trust me, I know. It's one of the flaws that plagued some of the SC official novels. I was actually going to say something like that in response to Mislag's question, that gameplay isn't really like real military history, but neither is it like a game either.

Though I'm afraid neither of your examples work for me, because I want the reader to feel like more of a participant in the action, and want the perspective to look more like how it would from one individual perspective. Like, a soldier on the ground isn't going to know that a specific airship dropped a bomb, they're going to see an explosion of earth, react by instinct, and then perhaps a moment later realize that it was indeed a bomb, and what kind of plane might have dropped it.

[Turalyon]

^ Hmm, makes me wonder why you'd even want to know the gameply aspects of the units are then. It's not really all that important. There's always going to be "ludonarrative dissonance" when you're going to exposit a battle scene from a detached third-person perspective. It's good you're going for a first person perspective since you don't necessarily have to give out those details (the character we're following doesn't necessarily have to have omniscient knowledge of the fan reader and the reader should give latitude for that). Only the anal-retentive game players will harp on whether an air unit is firing on ground units when it actually can't in gameplay and I presume they wouldn't be the intended audience for your story anyway.

[Nissa]

Well, the fact of the matter is in writing you have to know at least three times whatever you're putting on the page. Even in a made up culture, people will do things for reasons that exist in their own world, even if the reader isn't told that reason. By having an understanding of how things work in the SC world, I can make it feel more like the game, even if in subtle, non-obvious ways. I mean, why bother writing fanfiction if I'm not going to reference the source? My comment above was mainly on writing style, not on research.

[Turalyon]

I mean, why bother writing fanfiction if I'm not going to reference the source?

Yeah, but your fanfiction is the reference to the source in and of itself already. All I was trying to say was that you don't necessarily need the details and minutiae of the gameplay to do that "referencing" for you since it will more likely and potentially constrain yourself. I mean, really, there isn't a solid lore reason why airborne Vikings can't attack ground (since it's only really for gameplay/balance reasons). There isn't a solid reason why we can't have Vikings in "real fictional universe life" carry bombs/weapons for land engagements (or their machine guns, which they use only for their landform for some reason...), neither.

Heck, the Raven can also be utilised in your story as the stealth bomber akin to modern day drones used in warfare as it used to have a seeker missile ability. I say "used to" because it's been removed/replaced by a missile that does no damage and only temporarily removes armour.

In fact, the units in the game can change so much/markedly due to "balance" reasons such that it's probably unwise to look to gameplay for the actual capabilities of the unit in "real fictional universe life". Protoss Carriers have world-purifiying lasers on them but they aren't used in gameplay for obvious reasons (and story reasons too since most encoutners would be over very quickly one would imagine if they could utilise them in military engagements...). If we only looked at what they did during gameplay or obtained our knowledge of those units from what we saw in the gameplay, you'd never have known that and/or have written them as not having that ability.

[Mislagnissa]

Are you sure that’s the logic you want to use? Turalyon and I already explained at length that key plot points break down once you start forcing the story to be realistic. The protoss have fleets of death stars, the psi-emitter is a crippling weakness to the zerg, the terrans are all complete morons, etc

[Nissa]

Yeah, but your fanfiction is the reference to the source in and of itself already. All I was trying to say was that you don't necessarily need the details and minutiae of the gameplay to do that "referencing" for you since it will more likely and potentially constrain yourself. I mean, really, there isn't a solid lore reason why airborne Vikings can't attack ground (since it's only really for gameplay/balance reasons). There isn't a solid reason why we can't have Vikings in "real fictional universe life" carry bombs/weapons for land engagements (or their machine guns, which they use only for their landform for some reason...), neither.

Heck, the Raven can also be utilised in your story as the stealth bomber akin to modern day drones used in warfare as it used to have a seeker missile ability. I say "used to" because it's been removed/replaced by a missile that does no damage and only temporarily removes armour.

In fact, the units in the game can change so much/markedly due to "balance" reasons such that it's probably unwise to look to gameplay for the actual capabilities of the unit in "real fictional universe life". Protoss Carriers have world-purifiying lasers on them but they aren't used in gameplay for obvious reasons (and story reasons too since most encoutners would be over very quickly one would imagine if they could utilise them in military engagements...). If we only looked at what they did during gameplay or obtained our knowledge of those units from what we saw in the gameplay, you'd never have known that and/or have written them as not having that ability.


....I was trying to be polite, Tura. I didn't want to say it out loud. My original comment was due to Blade's writing style, and I think his examples were poorly written. The narrative style was awful. That's all I meant. Sheesh.


But if you're going to ramble on about this, sometimes the point of fanfiction is to make the original make sense. And to not say something about a unit that's going to distract the reader from the story. I mean, come on, do you really want me to treat the SC canon the way Blizzard did? I've got to have some integrity.

[The_Blade]

Lol Yea no harm done, Nissa. I wrote that up with an omniscient narrator just to make my point, tho sorry for stating the obvious. I often go full Jack London, despite hating his ass, too. I also do not know how to write action. IMO very few authors do. Considering how vocal Misla has been about military fiction, I decided to recount all the books I've read that fit the genre. I honestly only remember a few books fondly and despite dealing with strategy and/or war very few had action.

I guess what I was trying to communicate is that I hate textbook fan fiction. It's horrible and cringy at it's average and decent at it's best. Queen of Blades was full of this and many other SC novels. I agree with you 100% that there needs to be some form of integrity preserved in adapting the source material so that coherence exists. Otherwise we get the StarWars sequels LOL.

[Nissa]

Lol Yea no harm done, Nissa. I wrote that up with an omniscient narrator just to make my point, tho sorry for stating the obvious. I often go full Jack London, despite hating his ass, too. I also do not know how to write action. IMO very few authors do. Considering how vocal Misla has been about military fiction, I decided to recount all the books I've read that fit the genre. I honestly only remember a few books fondly and despite dealing with strategy and/or war very few had action.

Yeah, action really is hard. I'm not particularly good at it, though I did do a bit during a Mega Man fanfiction I wrote. It's easier when you're working with fighting robots rather than armies, however. Writing armies is hard unless you have real military experience. Which I do not have. All I really want is to be able to do military dialogue, like between generals and politicians that's hauntingly scary. Like they're moving real people like pawns.

Military nonfiction is usually better, but because of the way technology works nowadays, I've discovered that the old army movements of the past are obsolete. Like military pilots nowadays can very literally shoot things outside of their visible sight.


I guess what I was trying to communicate is that I hate textbook fan fiction. It's horrible and cringy at it's average and decent at it's best. Queen of Blades was full of this and many other SC novels. I agree with you 100% that there needs to be some form of integrity preserved in adapting the source material so that coherence exists. Otherwise we get the StarWars sequels LOL.

Ha. Well, honestly I have seen fanfiction that was good. I flatter myself that my Mega Man fanfiction is good, but really the absolute best I read was this one where Azumanga Daioh characters crossed over into the Star Trek universe. It was as if Azuma himself had written it. ...I'm trying to remember some Starcraft Fanfiction that was good, but honestly it's been so long since I read any that I don't know what to say.

[Turalyon]

....I was trying to be polite, Tura. I didn't want to say it out loud. My original comment was due to Blade's writing style, and I think his examples were poorly written. The narrative style was awful. That's all I meant. Sheesh.

Yeah well, I was responding to the context of your original post and questioning whether you really need to know the gameplay functions of the units to write your fanfiction. The short answer is no.


But if you're going to ramble on about this, sometimes the point of fanfiction is to make the original make sense. And to not say something about a unit that's going to distract the reader from the story. I mean, come on, do you really want me to treat the SC canon the way Blizzard did? I've got to have some integrity.

Eh, the point of most fanfiction is to allow the writer of such to focus on the aspects (and to embellish/exaggerate them usually) they find interesting about a particular IP - ie: fanwank.

No-one's going to be "distracted" by reading in your fanfiction that a unit hitting something it wouldn't normally hit because the gameplay isn't consistent with it. A reader of fanfiction knows there's going to be liberties being taken (or they should, rather...). If they do get annoyed about it, they're not the intended audience for your fanfic (ie: a person into "shipping" fanfic ain't gonna care). I don't really care how you treat the SC canon (I barely care for Sc canon and how Blizz treats it now generally - all the hate I've held for it has dissolved into apathy long ago) since I know it's fanfic at the end of the day.

[Nissa]

Whatever Tura. I'm still going to try for integrity.