This thread was almost painful to read, so many arbitrary statements...
And I have a question. Why exactly is the Thor a bad GtA unit? People seem to be throwing around the word "sucky" a lot without saying why.
Printable View
This thread was almost painful to read, so many arbitrary statements...
And I have a question. Why exactly is the Thor a bad GtA unit? People seem to be throwing around the word "sucky" a lot without saying why.
Because it works like a GTA Valkyre. The AOE Anti Air attack is multihit, ergo less effective against high Armor value Units. That attack has a HUGE range - counteracting the key advantage of air units - their mobility. (Remember Charon boosters?)
Apart from that the Thor is the Terrans most "meaty" unit, at least for cost and has apparently a "good" ergo not specialised GTG attack.
As mentioned it doesnīt guarrantee Air Superiority like some argue it should. Also there is ambiguity about itīs mobility, especially if itīs transportable.
But wouldn't all this be balanced out by the Thor's slowness and cost? Unlike the Goliath it's not a massable unit.Quote:
Originally Posted by unentschieden
I say we wait for those beta videos demonstrating the Thor :D We could actually be wanting to buff an already overpowered unit :)
Background
Since it's introduction into the game, I have always had a hatred of the Thor. I don't know why. It might be that it's reason at the time was to be a "beefier" Siege Tank. I have always loved the ST...I am a "turtle" player by nature. I don't like to attack...I like to defend and make sure no one can get into my area. The ST has been perfect for this. When you have it deploy and if you give it some Detection and some Anti-Air, you have almost the perfect defense. When the Thor was thrown into the equation, that was all thrown into the air. Sure, I could always decide to not build the Thor and keep using my ST turtle, but the Thor would then just sit there...unwanted and unused. Why have a unit like that in StarCraft 2? It would end up coming down to the decision for the player: Siege Tank or Thor.
Problem
They then gave it some AA-Guns and said "Hey, now look! It's not a beefed-up Siege Tank. It's has it's own purpose. It can shoot air units down with its pretty shoulder cannons and make fireworks in the sky!" Um.....why? There aren't any direct AA units for the Terran. There's the Viking and that unit is more of a mobile defense base. Then there's the Battlecruiser that can be upgraded to have a special anti-air special ability. Of course, you always have your trusty criminal marines. Other than that, there are no real DIRECT counters to air units. Here's a question that might throw some major RTS nuts off the line: why do we need one? Sure, the Valkyrie and the Wraith were really nice in StarCraft: Brood War...but, seriously why do you need this formula of direct counters, whether its a flying unit or not.
Solution
My proposal is this: cut the Thor....get rid of it....it has no purpose in the Terran arsenal. Don't create a unit that's sole purpose is to combat air units. That leaves you with one less choice to make on the battlefield....one less waste of minerals/gas.
IP02
Change the siege tank? HERESY!Quote:
Originally Posted by MattII
I like the current anti-armour role the thor has. Though I don't think it will be that useful in other matchups. vs zerg? ultralisk? hm.... vs toss? probably colossi. It really isn't worth it to counter units so it'd be better vs bases and base defenses, which incidentally also get raped by tanks. So if the thor is to fulfill this role, tanks must be made a pure anti-unit weapon. What then? people still don't build thors because massed base defenses is stupid and once you beat the defending army with your super anti-unit tanks you can just march in and destroy their economy anyways.
So yeah, changing tanks to accommodate the current thor is not worth it imo.
Siege tanks are already very different from before. They cost more and do more damage. They fire faster in tank mode and they are actually useful w/o siege tech. Siege mode has longer range and more power at the cost of additional cooldown. We'll be seeing less tanks on the field, less in siege mode, more often in tank mode. The 15+10 damage vs armored with normal attack speed really looks powerful, in contrast to the 30 explosive damage with slow attack speed.
What about giving the Viking in ground mode the ability to shoot air units with it's machineguns? Maybe even give the machineguns a bonus vs Light armor, then the Viking in air mode would be good vs heavy air targets (as it's today), and good vs Light air/ground units while in ground mode. But to be honest, maybe it's currently fair vs light air, anyways.
The Thor can then be what it looks like: a heavy damage soaker. It could be given a specific role, like a counter to Armored units, with a slow, powerfull attack that deals increased damage against them, for example: 30 (+70 vs Armored).
Maybe throw some special ability in, like call down Drop Pods filled with Marines (with an energy, mineral and supply cost), and it could also have Defensive Matrix, and what about some smoke bomb that blocks vision (or just enemy vision), like if it would be tall grass, or something like that?
To me, the Thor is becoming a valkyre on the ground, plus a ground attack for the sake of defending itself. Im ok with it, but I wouldnt mind a change. What makes it better than a valk is it should actually works, because I hated when valks froze in SC1. Not to mention its a meat shield with incredible range. This will make the Thor a really great support unit, but not massable, which excuses its high cost.
As far as an anti air tank, I always thought if they were gonna do something like that, it would be just another research to the regular tank, and it would be a heavy gta, because the Terrans currently lack that. Meanwhile the Thor would be for AoE Gta.
You could still do my idea, but with shorter range on the missiles (4 instead of 6).
over/under powered aside, the only thing that bugs me about the thor is the sheer size of the damn thing.
technically, it's replacing the goliath more or less right? Well... how difficult must it be to bring 5-6 thors from 1 side of your base to other during a muta or even carrier harass? Its size would cause major traffic and due to it's slow speed already... it's an easy micro battle ftw and it's not in the thor's favor
I would prefer if the goliath made a comeback, and a thor considered as a heavy assult unit vs ground. But then again, with the BC's and seige tanks already in game, i don't think terran needs it, unless it's like a mothership where you can only have 1 on the field @ once. Then zerg fans would need one too, and then there's the queen and NOW we're getting into like 4 new subjects.
But yes - lets see some beta videos first, then we'll make a true statement for it's usefulness
Finally - No wayyyy would I want a AA siege tank. That's soooooo much micro. I don't think it's fair. you'd spend all your time seiging and unsieging all the damn time.
Haven't you be reading the thread? No! The viking replaces the goliath. The thor replaces the Valkyrie, it just happens to be a big ground unit.Quote:
Originally Posted by REF
1) Thors have range 10. You won't have to move around a lot. I presume the long range is to make up for the inevitable traffic jam.Quote:
Well... how difficult must it be to bring 5-6 thors from 1 side of your base to other during a muta or even carrier harass?
2) Thors suck vs carriers just like valkyries do. (See the first question/answer.) It's also not that slow.
Blizzard tried that before. For some reason they dumped the idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Norfindel
The ground attack is does 60 damage. That's not just defending itself, that's kicking ass. It's designed to destroy fortified positions, it better have a decent attack.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy_Jonny
I think the original Thor was fine. A ground-based version of the Battlecruiser, IMO, with flexibility based on its unique construction. The current Thor sounds like a beefed up Goliath with STA splash. I know this has been said countless times before, but the Thor should go back to SCV-built and the Viking take its place at the Factory with Air-Mode build at a Tech Lab add-on to the Starport. Given that the Banshee has cloak and splash, it seems that it effectively makes the Viking obsolete, especially since I understand the Viking needs a Tech Lab while the Banshee does not.
A anti Air AOE range of 10 is way more significant than it looks. Its pretty much custom made against Mutalisks which - stack, have low HP and a short attack range. Itīs also notifiable that In normal cases range 10 is beyond sight range. Just use a cloaked Banshee/Ghost as scout and they wonīt even know what hit them (shooting no longer reveals FOW).
There is a slight difference between weak and inefficient. The Thor is strong in GTG but the Siegetank is stronger and cheaper. Itīs like trying to replace Zerglings with Ultralisks - the ultra LOOKS like the upsized version of the Zergling but its anything but.
Like the ultralisk, the thor is a meat shield more than a damage dealer. (It seems to have lost its Rebirth ability, and has some sort of offensive Plasma Cannon ability.)
I believe it was created to give terrans an option for GtG combat beyond using siege tanks. And of course you can mix them up. Put the thors in front, and let them take 400 damage worth of hits from the zealots while your siege tanks take less ground fire. (The thor can also protect the tanks from void rays and phoenixes using Anti Gravity.)
The original thor used to be built by scvs. Perhaps there are ways in which the thor can be made to be both a structure and a unit. Sort of a mobile command post for armies.
Perhaps make the thor the detector unit for terran. the new raven seems to be taking a more combat role anyways. Or give it the ability to repair air units rapidly like the starbase used to. Maybe even give it a scarab/spidermine/defensive drone hybrid. It builds little seeker missiles that automatically target enemy ground units.
Making the thor a combat unit imo will just ruin its image as a gigantic mechanical monstrosity. It shouldn't be a main fighting unit against anything but its mere presence should be able to turn the tide of a battle.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZKFKPGXb88
I know this match is outdated but the main unit that seemed to be used was the Thor. I just wanted to bring this up because in the past it seemed to be overpowered to me and I hope this has been changed.
Return the Thor to its original incarnation, and add an altered Starcraft version of this:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...3/34/Ontos.jpg
Of course the original wasn't an AA tank, but it looks cool regardless and those six 106mm barrels can be made to either fire rapidly or AoE at air targets (and perhaps ground?).
"the tank should be the Terran's siege unit! " as someone commented on you tube.
Thor seems to be too big and slow, therefore useless.
Is it me or it's just that the hatred towards the Thor is because it is a biped that resembles the old goliath with a an air attack that works like the valkyrie, and a massive size that just makes the tank pale and seem too small.
(I think thor looks too "wide" that's my opinion)
Am I right?:p
Interesting idea, but I'd prefer something like:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lupino
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...her-France.jpg
ie, a bolt-on for the existing tank, possibly as an alternative to the Siege Mode (like the Battlecruiser).
Meh, I'd rather the Factory get a new unit than just having a bolt-on feature for the ST.
Problem being that the other unit you want is either a ST clone (uncool) or the Thor.
The Thor is perfectly fine as is. We don't need the Goliath back in the game, as it makes air units completely useless. Looking through this thread for people's "solutions" I'm disappointed by much of what I see. Nearly everything is something Blizzard has already tried.
Returning the Thor to its previous incarnation will accomplish nothing. Those changes suggested to make this viable were already tested and failed.
You mean like, the Missile it already has in BR2... The healing was also something it had back as the Nomad, but has long since been replaced.Quote:
Perhaps make the thor the detector unit for terran. the new raven seems to be taking a more combat role anyways. Or give it the ability to repair air units rapidly like the starbase used to. Maybe even give it a scarab/spidermine/defensive drone hybrid. It builds little seeker missiles that automatically target enemy ground units.
StarCraft has never been forgiving for turtle players, in fact most times a turtle player will lose due to a lack of map control and running out of minerals. As for Thor, you don't need to build it if you don't want to. Siege tanks already are more expensive, defenses are easier to bypass, air has a larger role, it looks like you'll need to start thinking of better ways to play or raids will take you down quickly. The fact of the matter is, Starcraft 2 isn't a game where most people can turtle.Quote:
Since it's introduction into the game, I have always had a hatred of the Thor. I don't know why. It might be that it's reason at the time was to be a "beefier" Siege Tank. I have always loved the ST...I am a "turtle" player by nature. I don't like to attack...I like to defend and make sure no one can get into my area. The ST has been perfect for this. When you have it deploy and if you give it some Detection and some Anti-Air, you have almost the perfect defense. When the Thor was thrown into the equation, that was all thrown into the air. Sure, I could always decide to not build the Thor and keep using my ST turtle, but the Thor would then just sit there...unwanted and unused. Why have a unit like that in StarCraft 2? It would end up coming down to the decision for the player: Siege Tank or Thor.
Because, like it or not, air units are a factor this time around. If you don't have something that is especially good against air units of any kind, then your entire ground force will get raped. We have air units that are designed to kill ground units, so we need ground ways to counter air. Now, they can't be good against all forms of air otherwise it gets broken very very fast.Quote:
Other than that, there are no real DIRECT counters to air units. Here's a question that might throw some major RTS nuts off the line: why do we need one? Sure, the Valkyrie and the Wraith were really nice in StarCraft: Brood War...but, seriously why do you need this formula of direct counters, whether its a flying unit or not.
That won't do any good. If you don't want to use it, fine don't use it, but it's not only for fighting air units. It's a meatshield, it does decent damage against ground, and counters large masses of light air. You seem to misunderstand this. Also, you keep talking as though you are forced to build one, "wasting your minerals and gas", but you don't need to build it. If you feel your army is better off without, then don't make any and I'll laugh when you start crying because muta swarms destroyed your army of tanks and vikings.Quote:
My proposal is this: cut the Thor....get rid of it....it has no purpose in the Terran arsenal. Don't create a unit that's sole purpose is to combat air units. That leaves you with one less choice to make on the battlefield....one less waste of minerals/gas.
Lastly, in response to the OP. Why would you add a siege tank that kills air? Not only would it be unoriginal, but it would be incredibly broken. The Siege Tank's main weakness is that it's useless against air. If you then add a unit that is exactly the same, but vs air then pile them all up together you have an indestructible lump of turret units. Now, that may be what you want to see, but that's not very good when it comes to game balance.
I want my APC unit in the game ;(, it was soooo balanced and sooo awesome.
APC sounds good to me, can you link me to the original?
[edit] I've got it now.
What about the Thor carrying Infantry units inside, like a transport? At least it will be usefull to keep them alive, and release them when the enemy units are attacking the Thor. Big surprise.Quote:
Originally Posted by spychi
We need another APC thread, it seems. In a game like StarCraft, I believe APC units are lame.