Huh... just looked it up and it's a lot different from what I remember. Although I still stand by the analysis that the guns are too fat, it look a lot better than I remember.
Printable View
Huh... just looked it up and it's a lot different from what I remember. Although I still stand by the analysis that the guns are too fat, it look a lot better than I remember.
This is an "i" and this is an exclamatory mark "¡"Quote:
Originally Posted by Triceron
By the way if the mutalisk got its OP attack from the alpha stage of the original StarCraft, would you guys accept it as a relatively good unit?
What, spitting gobs of acid?Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Blade
Even if that is doing AoE, IDK.
You must have really hated the Siege Tank, then.Quote:
also because "TRANSFORM AND ROLL OUT!" never appealed to me.
Got anything to back that up with? I've seen exactly one video where Mutalisks were used, and they did OK. Not great, but not terrible.Quote:
Since mutas are not very useful in sc2 scraping them is not a problem.
man kill the hydra and mutalisk! both units makes the sc2 zerg BOOOOOORRRINNNG!
NEw units please. the protoss dragoon was removed the same could be done for the hydra.
Hydralisk attacking air units doesn't even make sense lorewise. Yeah being stupid just for the sake of gameplay.
I know, cuz marines shooting down battlecruisers makes so much more sense
*Squints*Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
Alright, bucko, go look at the original Siege Tank. There were three stages, or parts that transform, or what have you. Stabilizers slide out from storage on top, the main cannons are retracted into the turret while the other end slides out, and the turret elevates itself.
There was none of this Optimus Prime crap with panels unfolding, gun barrels splitting, and stuff popping out from between the treads. Quite honestly, the flashy Hasbro Toy didn't quite fit with the rough'n'ready Terrans that fielded Vultures and dropped nukes like they were on sale.
I'll admit that it's what we've got NOW, but I still can't help but feel that the Viking mechanic would have gone well with the Zerg, and the Arclite Siege tank never needed to be given the boot.
Furthermore, it seems that Ensemble Studios got the idea for the Cobra (Age of Spaceology unit) directly from the Crucio Siege Tank, giving me another reason to hate it.
About as much sense as mechs being effective battlefield weapons...Quote:
Originally Posted by Triceron
But hey, lorewise, they CAN do that. Hell, in real life, twenty AK-47s can take out a low-flying gunship.
I meant the fact that one of the ST's quotes is literally "Transform and roll out."Quote:
Alright, bucko, go look at the original Siege Tank.
No, it wouldn't. Because it would have been an active ability, which (except for burrow and dedicated spellcasters) is forbidden on Zerg units.Quote:
I still can't help but feel that the Viking mechanic would have gone well with the Zerg
See, this is why everyone is so upset that the Zerg "aren't new". Because nobody understood the rules for Zerg units. They just figure you can call anything a Zerg unit. Nobody except the developers seems to understand that there are specific rules Zerg units have to follow in order to be Zerg units.
FORBIDDEN!!!!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by nicol bolas
black
marines makes more sense they have guns. Hydralisk may sprain their necks doing it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Triceron
You do know its because of gameplay reason why the hydralisk is the zerg gta attack unit no matter how it looks or feel lorewise and you dont give a damn about it, admit it.
Also marines role is not primarily against air units unlike the is hydralisk being pictured.
In sci-fi mechs are normal and can pwnd any of your preffered ground vehicles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quirel
AK-47s might work but hydralisk looks dumb shooting at air units, the zerg could have just made a ground guardian that shoots greens bombs against air units which would look more fitting and make sense. Blizzard can't think of anything better at the moment since they want to keep the iconic zerg hydralisk for you.
Ah. Huh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
I'm positive I heard that quote in the Terran Unveil, used by a Viking group. And then I heard that it was a quote from Transformers. Which led to me associating it with the new "Hasbro Toys" Terran units.
I didn't play the original with sound unless it was campaign or I was playing Zerg (and entering the "Radio Free Zerg" cheat) so I forgot that it had that quote.
The way I saw it, it was an update of the old Devourer<-Mutalisk->Guardian. A unit would get radically different stats and a role, but would be able to transfer back to that role when the situation demands it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
Nobody except the developers and you, you mean.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
I'd say that more CENTRAL pillars of the Zerg are that
1)They're massable and quick.
2)They have generalists and specialists, with nothing in between.
3)They can rapidly switch from one army setup to another.
Downing a BC with guns makes as much sense as tossing stones with sling shots. It makes no difference whatsoever; it still makes no sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by electricmole
Which is still no excuse for the fact that mechas as war machines make no sense at all.Quote:
In sci-fi mechs are normal and can pwnd any of your preffered ground vehicles.
And if anyone can come up with a better idea for hydralisks and mutalisks beyond a facelift that would still work for the Zerg, I'm all ears.
I assumed that was implied, since you know, I made the post.Quote:
Nobody except the developers and you, you mean.
And the "transfer back" part is what makes it an active ability rather than unit production (which is what unit mutation currently is).Quote:
A unit would get radically different stats and a role, but would be able to transfer back to that role when the situation demands it.
Actually, it is. It's called the "Rule of Cool". That is, you can get away with anything in fiction if it's sufficiently cool. Mechs are cool, a lot cooler than a dull, boring tank. So you can get away with having them fight.Quote:
Which is still no excuse for the fact that mechas as war machines make no sense at all.
I'm just wondering, why do the zerg units have almost no active abilities, compared to the protoss or the terran?
For example an antiair only ability might work well with the hydra and it's role, or even an ability that would include it's melle animation in some way, for example.
And if active abilities are "forbiden", how about pasive?
And again, "Rule of Cool" still doesn't stop the fact that giant bipedal mechas don't make sense. Point being is that giant mechs or shooting down massive starships with the equivalent of pellet guns is no better than hydras shooting anything with spines, so talking about 'things that make sense' in terms of a game in a sci-fi setting is rather irrelevant. In that case, this is simply all about what look cool to the eyes, and if that's the only reason for replacing units like the hydralisk or mutalisk, then that's not a good enough reason. I think we can both agree on that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
For the same reason that almost all Terran units have active abilities, and that Protoss units have high Hp, and every other racial trait that exists. It differentiates the races and ensures that there is uniqueness to the play-style of each race.Quote:
I'm just wondering, why do the zerg units have almost no active abilities, compared to the protoss or the terran?
Ok, Nicol's officially lost his crackers. Admitting one to New Folsam's Psych Ward.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
I agree, i would understand if he would say that active abilities are not so popular or relevant to the zerg, but "forbiden", come on that's just ridiculous.Quote:
Originally Posted by DemolitionSquid
And to think i actualy used to respect his debating skills:o
Indeed.
Zerg don't have active abilities because they usually die to fast to use them. Zerg strength lies in large numbers of weak units. Protoss have a lot of active abilities because each unit can survive long enough to make good use of them.
It's for this reason that the balance in DoW2 has failed. The Tyranids work fine, they have few active abilities and just swarm. But the Eldar are as (if not more) fragile, and are loaded with spells they just can't survive long enough to use.
Zerg can have active spells. There is no rule they can't, its just not as practical to their playstyle.
Sprain their necks? When Hydralisks are essentially long ropes of bone and muscle?Quote:
Originally Posted by electricmole
Let me explain what I was saying. Ten Marines shooting down a Battlecruiser is like ten soldiers trying to gun down a battleship anchored five miles offshore with assault rifles. To be fair, let's give them AKUs.
It doesn't matter how many bullets they fire, because that destroyer has 6" steel plating on the sides. And they won't be firing for long, because...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...shipFiring.jpg
Lorewise, the Hydralisk is shooting finger-long grooved spines (Fin stabilized, essentially) tipped with acid, fast enough to pierce two centimeters of neosteel.Quote:
Originally Posted by electricmole
And lorewise, there would be hundreds of them firing at the same time. And lorewise, they'd be attacking low-flying aircraft, leaving Battlecruisers and high-flying Wraiths to Scourges and Devourers.
Also marines role is not primarily against air units unlike the is hydralisk being pictured.
Right. In Sci-Fi, which is what StarCraft is. Which means that a Hydralisk can shoot down air units.Quote:
Originally Posted by electricmole
Mechs are the antithesis of common sense. Any development that would make them practical (or even possible) would only make tanks MORE effective against them.
Magical Gundanium armor, light as a feather and cannot be penetrated by normal means? Put it on a tank, and NO MECH would be able to kill it.
Recoilless guns that can rip apart skyscrapers and other mechs? Tanks would be able to mount larger ones.
Servos strong enough to swing limbs around and allow the mech to pull off ninja moves? Put the motor on a tank, and it will be able to turn it's turret, target, and fire at any angle in less than a second.
Common sense dictates that mechs would be completely useless in a war zone, but Rule of Cool lets them in. Common sense dictates that the Hydralisk would be unable to shoot down a battlecruiser, but Rule of Cool says they can shoot down a lot of other things in the air.
>.>Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
Says you.
Personally, I find tanks (Scorpion, Arclite, HK-Ground) to be MUCH more interesting than mechs (Gundam, Viking, Transformers)
While I agree that the Rule of Cool lets them fight, like Rule of Cool allows Hydralisks to shoot down Wraiths and such. But common sense, what electricmole was applying to the Hydralisk would disqualify all mechs in the game, as well as the Crucio Siege Tank and the Hellion.
I still respect his debating skills.Quote:
Originally Posted by Perfecttear
I just don't agree with him on this one point.
Lorewise, the Hydralisk is shooting spines as big as an AK-47 bullet WITH THE CASING at a faster velocity. If anything, it would be MORE effective than an AK-47.Quote:
Originally Posted by electricmole
That doesn't make any sense. Marines die pretty fast too, but they get Stim. Vultures die fast, but they get Spider Mines.Quote:
Zerg don't have active abilities because they usually die to fast to use them. Zerg strength lies in large numbers of weak units. Protoss have a lot of active abilities because each unit can survive long enough to make good use of them.
So I fail to see the correlation between "dying fast" and "has no active abilities". It's clearly a Zerg racial trait.
I'm an animation buff. And not in the sense of cartoons, but in the sense of movement. Mechs have a lot of movement: arms, legs, head, weapons, etc. When a 'Mech turns 120 degrees to shoot something, innumerable independent things have to turn around. This gives the shot an importance and a feeling of emphasis.Quote:
Personally, I find tanks (Scorpion, Arclite, HK-Ground) to be MUCH more interesting than mechs (Gundam, Viking, Transformers)
Tanks just turn a turret. 1 thing moving. It really doesn't get more boring.
I also happen to like mechas more than 'mere' tanks and aircraft myself because, being machines that are closer to a living being in appearance with numerous animated parts, they're just more exciting and identifiable. It's why I happen to like the Thor and the Viking when they were first revealed.
But that's another debate for another day. In the end of all this, I chose the hydralisk over the other two units for its importance in the swarm. Of course, I could've picked the ultras as well because I also thought they were massive and simply damn cool. :P
Shoving active abilities on units who can't make use of them is pointless.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
The Marine is ranged, it can be microed. It doesn't need Stim, but for some reason (one I disagree with) Blizzard felt it should be given an ability. Zerglings cannot be microed to the extent of Marines. They were given the one active ability that's useful - the ability to avoid damage for a time through Burrow.
The Vulture is a hugely limited unit because of its Concussive attack. I have no idea why they did this, but it was a stupid idea. Instead of fixing the Vulture's attack, they decided to give it Mines. Now, Mines define the unit. The whole thing is a farce.
If Hydralisks, who could be microed, and were pretty hardy, had been given an active ability in SC1, would you have complained? No. But they never needed one. Hydralisks we so cheap and massable and versatile, you'd always have so many that any active ability aside from something like Stim would have been pointless, as every Hydralisk would have used it all the time, in greater numbers than Marines with Stim.
Active abilities exist for two reasons: to supplement a unit, and for promoting skill. In targeting, timing, and control. The Stalker has Blink because Dragoons had bad pathing. But there was never anything wrong with the Hydralisk. Giving it an active ability just for the sake of it is pointless. It goes against the unit's mass design. Its not excluded because "Zerg can't have active abilities." Its excluded because its simply unnecessary for the unit to have its cost raised because of an ability it has worked fine without.
I don't know, I think I agree with Squid that mines define what the vulture are, same with the marine, stim is what defines the unit, it's useless without it TBH.
But I can't say whether that's a good or bad thing.
Whether you agree or disagree with Blizzard's decision, two things are clear from the unit design of SC1:Quote:
The Marine is ranged, it can be microed. It doesn't need Stim, but for some reason (one I disagree with) Blizzard felt it should be given an ability. Zerglings cannot be microed to the extent of Marines. They were given the one active ability that's useful - the ability to avoid damage for a time through Burrow.
The Vulture is a hugely limited unit because of its Concussive attack. I have no idea why they did this, but it was a stupid idea. Instead of fixing the Vulture's attack, they decided to give it Mines. Now, Mines define the unit. The whole thing is a farce.
1: They made a conscious effort to give almost every Terran unit an activated ability. Where you might have changed a units damage to broaden its utility, they said, "give it an ability."
2: They made a conscious effort not to give Zerg units an activated ability apart from the shared Burrow. Where you might have given a unit an active ability to broaden its utility, they said "no."
So it doesn't matter whether you think Stim or Mines are a good idea. Blizzard is the one who sets what the rules are for race design. Blizzard decides what makes each race unique. And Blizzard has shown, through both SC1 and SC2 development, that both of the above are racial qualities of their respective races: Terran units get lots of activated abilities, and Zerg units get none. Not having active abilities is as much a racial quality of the Zerg as their centralized production method.
You may not like these rules. You may think they're constraining and confining to good design. But these are the rules. The design of two StarCraft games now has shown these to be the rules.
Before the reaper, how many Teran units had multiple abilities? Before the Infestor, how many units could move while burrowed? Before the Battlecruiser, how many units had choosable upgrades?
Blizzard adds and changes things based on interesting design and concept, there's no unwritten rule that can't be broken.
Stop taking logic lessons from Archer. Just because Zerg didn't have active abilities in SC1 doesn't mean they can't have them in SC2. Its not like we're talking about Zerg having robotic units, of course that's insane. You're denying Zerg active abilities based on absolutely nothing. If a Zerg unit needed an active ability aside from Burrow or it being a spellcaster, it would be given one. There just aren't any units which need them, because Zerg are simple, and Zerg have numbers, and Zerg normally die too quick to make good use of active abilities.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
Patterns are not the same as rules.
Never thought i would say this, but i completely agree with him on everything, that's one smart squid/cthulhu :)Quote:
Originally Posted by DemolitionSquid
Is it me or has the Hydra animation lost its prominence? SC1 Hydras had the right thing going on, but SC2 makes them quite a step down from that.
I agree, SC1 hydras were cool but the SC2 ones are kind of lame.Quote:
Originally Posted by Draco
Here's how it get's more boring:Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
Gundam on Gundam. Energy PWNZER sword against gatling rockets.
The fact that a mech has to turn all the way around is pretty much negated by the fact that they're either towing around assault-rifle like weapons (doesn't look as powerful as a tank's main gun) or a huge wave motion tuning fork... which has a huge 'yeah, right' factor tied in with it.
I like a few mechs, like the Dragoon, Goliath, and Skynet Centurion (You've probably never heard of that last one) but I'm mostly a fan of conventional military hardware. MBTs, gunships, MLRSs, dropships, cluster munitions...
This is not to say I'm not a fan of something ridiculous, so long as it's cool.
http://strangevehicles.greyfalcon.us...esc/ratte7.jpg
http://strangevehicles.greyfalcon.us...c/ratte100.jpg
http://strangevehicles.greyfalcon.us...m/monster1.gif
http://strangevehicles.greyfalcon.us/pictured/st800.jpg
http://strangevehicles.greyfalcon.us...resm/ratte.jpg
I have to admit, I'm finding all of those designs to be pretty ugly and boring myself.
True, #4 was ugly AND stupid, but it's supposed to have been built by Saddam Insane.
But seriously, be it from battletech to Gundam to Macross, if you've seen one, you've seen every single mech out there.
LOL really? That's pretty crazy alright, I thought it was something out of a sci fi universe.Quote:
True, #4 was ugly AND stupid, but it's supposed to have been built by Saddam Insane.
As near as I can tell, it's a joke on Saddam Hussein and the Sand Crawler, but since Saddam Insane tried to build a gun that could put projectiles into orbit...
Lets face this from different aspects.
Under the laws of most effective:
A mech moves thousands of articulations and gears in order to point and shoot, recoil and move back into possition. Overally it uses a lot of energy in order to move all those joints.
A tank turns its turret, calculates distance and fires. Overally it wasted near non of energy in this process.
Under the laws of cool:
Seeing how a mech moves around is wicked cool and a great eye candy.
Seeing a tank move its turret and fire is cool enough.
Under the laws of lifestand:
A single projectile hits a mech, it might never move again. Look at you over a billion wreak.
A single projectile has high probabilities of taking down a tank, but it might still have less than half of a performance after the hit. Afterwards wounded or death tanks are sended back to the factory where they are easily repaired.
Under the laws of variety:
A mech might be loaded with any kind of light weapons, else it would recoil down to the ground. Another issue, when requested to flee it might move too slow if it carries a heavy weapon and heavy plating in order to survive the field battle.
A tank might have any kind of weapon as long as it is big enough to hold it. There's always a bigger motor with more horsepower to move these guys.
Under the laws of point and shoot
The mech will move more articulations but it will not have blind spots nor a slow rotation (light mech).
Tank limited vision due to high armor, blind points due to movement and a medium speed turret rotation.
i voted for the hydra.
it just represents the whole zerg. remember the ultra, zergling, and lurker started out with hydra heads. blizz has given make overs to all the zerg units making them almost unrecognizable. the hydra is the only face left that isn't twisted.
That's purely your opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quirel
http://www.gearsonline.net/btech/mechs.phpQuote:
Originally Posted by flabortast
Basically, the mechs go from skinny to fat, from top to bottom. That's from an established universe (Battletech) and the only reason I didn't use examples from Gundam is because that site doesn't have a comprehensive archive of mech thumbnails.